For the uneducated, “Galileo di Vincenzo Bonaiuti de’ Galilei (15 February 1564 – 8 January 1642) was an Italian astronomer, physicist and engineer, sometimes described as a polymath.” But he is most famous for his courage in insisting that the earth revolved around the Sun — a belief that was considered heretical by the Catholic Church — and enduring punishment for believing in something we now know to be an immutable truth.
We now live in an age when the influence of the Catholic Church has waned and been replaced by a secular religion that insists Global Climate Change poses an existential threat and that there is no such thing as biological males and females. The new Secular faith demands you bow before multiple genders and retreat from the belief that men cannot have babies.
Future historians (I am making the wild assumption that we will survive the next few years without a nuclear holocaust) will look back on this age and marvel at the derangement that seized the medical, scientific and political elites. Mass insanity rages around us. The political leaders of Western nations are obsessed with the nonsensical belief that humans can control climate by eliminating fossil fuels and relying solely on wind, solar and maybe a little hydro power to run modern cities.
The truth of the so-called “Green” movement is that it hinges on transferring public resources to well connected political elites, like Al Gore, to erect technological boondoggles. The push for transitioning to electric vehicles is just one example of the delusion. Betsy Reed, an editor at the Guardian, recently wrote:
The US’s transition to electric vehicles could require three times as much lithium as is currently produced for the entire global market, causing needless water shortages, Indigenous land grabs, and ecosystem destruction inside and outside its borders, new research finds.
It warns that unless the US’s dependence on cars in towns and cities falls drastically, the transition to lithium battery-powered electric vehicles by 2050 will deepen global environmental and social inequalities linked to mining – and may even jeopardize the 1.5C global heating target.
The lithium mining enterprise is an old story in modern clothes of Colonial imperialism exploiting the poorest countries and most impoverished people so that entitled elites can virtue signal by driving their Teslas to dine and shop at exclusive locations.
This absurd detachment from reality is not confined to the religion of Climate Change. The world’s population has just passed through a period that combined Orwellian thought with the medical expertise of Dr. Josef Mengele as untested vaccines were forced on people in the name of “science”, without adhering to any of the foundations of scientific practice. ABC News reported last year that:
A growing proportion of COVID-19 deaths are occurring among the vaccinated, a new ABC News analysis of federal data shows.
In August of 2021, about 18.9% of COVID-19 deaths occurred among the vaccinated. Six months later, in February 2022, that proportional percent of deaths had increased to more than 40%.
And the lethality of the vaccine injuries has continued to increase. The good news, at least for those in the poorest countries, is that the entitled in the wealthiest nations are suffering the most harm. God or Karma certainly has a sense of humor. A grim comeuppance for the virtue signalers.
In the tradition of Galileo, the rational thinkers who dare to challenge the delusional conventional wisdom surrounding Climate Change, Covid, Gender Transition, and the war party intent on destroying Russia and China are shunned, shouted down, canceled and even punished.
The case of Douglass Mackey is an alarming case in point:
Mackey, who had over 58,000 followers on his account using the name “Ricky Vaughn” prior to the 2016 election, posted an image on Twitter advertising the ability to vote for Hillary Clinton by text, prompting at least 4,900 individuals to do so, according to the Department of Justice (DOJ) news release. He was charged in January 2021 under a “conspiracy against rights” law that makes it an offense “to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person … in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution.”
Aaron Terr, director of Public Advocacy for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), a legal organization that defends free speech, told the Daily Caller News Foundation that it is “difficult to see how any of those terms apply to merely saying something false about the election.”
If you are gullible enough to be hoodwinked by a troll on Twitter, you probably are not smart enough to be trusted to cast a ballot in any election. This is the kind of nonsense that the old Soviet Union did and that the United States cited as proof that America’s system of justice and freedom was inherently superior. The shoe is now on the other foot.
It ain’t easy being Galileo. But the world desperately needs modern day Galileos who will speak truth based on evidence and facts. Many will be punished but their fight for truth will outlive the current madness. We just need to have the courage to challenge the conventional wisdom and try to persuade the blind masses to reject the lies. Are you prepared to be a Galileo?
If you want to dig deeper into the energy delusion please watch my friend, Mark Mills:
Sorry but the physics/chemistry of the carbon molecule is unassailable. It’s as unassailsble as biological sex assignment, DNA etc.
One can argue about the rate and scale of the impact of human carbon emissions on the atmospheric “green house effect ” and certainly whether there is any substantial biospheric threat at all–all of that is debatable…but you literally cannot argue that human industrial carbon emissions do not contribute to warming. and to place that debate anywhere near the category of the debate over gender–thereby dismissing the debate as mere scientist or something… calls for a a book recommendation:
Biswapriya Purkayastha says
Unfortunately one of the effects of the covfefevirus imbroglio is that it’s now mainstream to be suspicious of all science, no matter how well founded and established.
Yep! As an old friend of mine used to quip — jokingly, of course — “There is no gravity; the Earth sucks.”
Bazza McKenzie says
Well said John.
A. Dane says
You made a mistake when writing that the Catholic Church no longer has any influence on new Religions.
The head of the Church (the Vatican) is in conspiracy with the imperialist Fascist Dynasties of Europe, Britain and America, who wants a Fascist Global world Order, controlled by them.
The Vatican with the Pope in front, is absolutely behind both the new religions of Global Warming, A world religion called Satanism, with accept of Pedophilia, accept of transgender ism, accept of abortion, accept of Euthanasia, and the destruction of every other religion.
And the Vatican has the money to do it.
Money they collected throughout centuries from the global Christian population, as indulgence for their sins, in order to avoid purgatory after death.
I guess All Gore was jealous of all the wealth accumulated by the Vatican Church, and thus invented a new purgatory of Global warming extinction, so people now can pay indulgence for their Co2 sins. To him.
I sometimes wonder if we are still living in 1623.
Michael Thomson says
Perhaps you might begin by understanding that Carbon is not a molecule, it is an atom. Carbon dioxide is a molecule and a colourless, odourless gas that is plant food.
The Ideal Gas Law – PV = nRT. T = PV/nR is the ‘unassailable physics’ of the temperature (T) of gases. The most relevant variable here is P – Pressure. Nowhere in this equation is the chemistry of gas molecules relevant.
Does CO2 absorb IR? Yes. So does water. Water is present in all three phase in our atmosphere and the phase chemistry of water is not well understood at all. The influence of water and clouds on the climate is not well understood either and the models ignore it. Depending on the time of day and where on the planet you are there is much more water than CO2 in the atmosphere, and as far as ‘greenhouse gases’ go it has much more influence than anything related to ‘carbon’.
Climate models are intrinsically flawed as has been proven time and time again to the tune of them predicting tropospheric heating at 7 times the measured reality.
Larry is right.
The so-called ‘ Climate Crisis’ caused by human CO2 emissions is very much a scam at the level of the gender bullshit and COVID vaccines.
So say Happer, Lindzen, Curry, Nakamura and many many supremely qualified others. Get back in your box. It is a matter of science which has been fundamentally misrepresented and perverted by profiteering opportunists and idiots.
Thank you for a very accurate post
Spot on. The other fallacy is the term “fossil fuels”. Made up to make it appear far more limited.
Dr. Gary Vasey, who wrote his PhD on climate issues in 1984, would disagree with you. Quite to the contrary he points out that our current temperature and CO2 levels are almost at an all-time low – or at least haven’t been this low for the last 270 million years. He cites Scotese and Berner in his article. Moreover he draws attention to Scotese’s assertion that CO2 levels are at approximately one-quarter of the historical average, and that the current low 400ppm level has a significantly detrimental effect on plant life.
Alex Thrace says
All true and CO2 doesn’t really trap much heat, only in a very limited bandwidth which is saturated at a way lower level than we already have. Additional CO2 will only green the planet, true “green” technology.
Also the climate scientists[sic] are unaware of geological processes that provide positive and negative feedback keeping co2 levels in a certain band. Yes, CO2 is actually critically low at this point and lower than it was during points in the last major ice age.
Not only have you radically misconstrued the author’s comments regarding the current 400ppm level, but you’ve totally failed to notice that he is an energy industry consultant, not an active climate researcher:
Dr. Gary M. Vasey
Alex Thrace says
It’s the same thing, junk science made to serve politics to the detriment of freedom and humanity.
The CO2 global warming scam will be another laugh riot 100 years from now.
“They actually thought paying more taxes, enriching billionaires and eating bugs would change the weather.”
We definitely CAN argue about whether or not “human industrial carbon emissions do not contribute to warming”. No one has the knowledge as to what this experiment will do to our ecosystem. It is ongoing and not at all settled as to what will happen in the future.
Calogero pumo says
I read many times ago , i m 61 that in times of dinosaures the co2 was more hight that now they look in the stomates plant fossil
I read to thst in the past there was ice all the world and after it became more hot before human race make factories
Sorry i m french
No need to apologise for being French LOL
Willl Toffan says
In the late Triassic, early Jurassic until about 90 million years ago, the Earth was at its most beautiful and bountiful in life. The temperature averaged 2-5 degrees higher than today’s climate. I have a problem rounding that circle as well.
Allan Mountain says
Whether you realize it or not you have just fully validated Larry’s excellent summary of the entire fraud and Truman theater that has been very intentionally propagated to such devastating effects.
There are very sound methods to the apparent guise of madness pertaining to the gang who have propagated these fictions and the world is now in the final big awakening stage that they will not fully comprehend until they have been herded over the cliff and find themselves falling to the rocks below if they are not able to wake up in time and stop the criminal enterprise.
I could present to you tomes of scientific evidence from countless world leading scientists who have conclusively proven that there is no possible way to determine that global warming can be solely attributed to human activity as opposed to it being caused by naturally-occurring and repeating astronomical / sun cycles.
Sadly very few of the CO2 global warming believers have ever bothered to do the research required to fully inform themselves about the entire spectrum of the science relating to the field, and have even more astonishingly never heard of the ‘Maunder Minimum’, which a lot of very learned scientists maintain is what the world is about to go through. Maunder Minimums recur approx. every 350 to 400 years and result in cooling periods lasting approx. 70 years which they refer to as Little Ice Ages.
Following are three articles detailing the findings of scientists who are persuaded, based on massive recent reduction in solar activites known as ‘solar flares’ and ‘coronal mass ejections’, that we are now on the cusp of entering another Maunder Minimum Little Ice Age.
Physicist: Upcoming Grand Solar Minimum Could Wipe Out Global Warming for Decades
published 05 October 2020
and this published 12 May 2020 on Forbes
The Sun Is Asleep. Deep ‘Solar Minimum’ Feared As 2020 Sees Record-Setting 100-Day Slump
Extract from the article on Forbes as follows:
While we on Earth suffer from coronavirus, our star—the Sun—is having a lockdown all of its own. Spaceweather.com reports that already there have been 100 days in 2020 when our Sun has displayed zero sunspots.
That makes 2020 the second consecutive year of a record-setting low number of sunspots— which you can see (a complete absence of) here.
“This is a sign that solar minimum is underway,” reads SpaceWeather.com. “So far this year, the Sun has been blank 76% of the time, a rate surpassed only once before in the Space Age. Last year, 2019, the Sun was blank 77% of the time. Two consecutive years of record-setting spotlessness adds up to a very deep solar minimum, indeed.”
And for those more inclined to delving into the deeper science there is this:
Gradual onset of the Maunder Minimum revealed by high-precision carbon-14 analyses
09 March 2021
Of course when you search on The Maunder Minimum you will find high on the search links the usual NASA fake news refutations news blah blah blah – as to be expected – like the Roman Catholic Church in Galileo’s day they are the experts and what NASA says has to be the undeniable unquestionable truth on the subject.
Maunder Minimum aside, there are countless reports from many other scientists that debunk the nonsense there can be any conclusive and definitive conclusion that the recent small rise in global temperature is directly attributable to CO2 emissions.
All that aside, I used to work in industrial energy efficiency for several years and during that time I learned and experienced first-hand enough to have been left in no doubt that the CO2 terror campaign is one giant scam purpose designed to achieve the following outcome:
It is purpose designed to enable mandate of the first global tax.
It is intended that the CO2 international tax system will be enabled through smart phone technology (especially the tracking systems rolled out thanks Covid Plandemic) and the Internet of Things complex that is being setup and embraced by the masses because of their devotion to ‘convenience’ that Internet of Things is providing them.
Once the global CO2 tax regime has been tied noose-like around the world’s neck, (albeit I suspect the BRIC bloc are not going to play a long – hence another reason for wanting to smash them back into a CO2-reducing stone age) then everybody will be having to pay tax on every little thing they buy and every activity they engage in that produces CO2, which is just about everything bar nothing that everybody does, and may eventually include taxing every breath everybody takes and the amount of CO2 they expel measured on Body Mass Indexes.
And when this unfolds you can be assured that CO2 taxes will not be gathered and used by sovereign nations (of which there are no longer any in the Anglo-American-EU bloc) it will be swooped into a huge fund that will be managed by the UN-World Bank-IMF complex which means it will become the biggest ever tax haul in terms of notional fiat currency amounts running into trillions of dollars; which will of course no doubt be overseen by that monstrous dark force we call the Deep State, the head of which in my opinion resides in the central banking cartel which is overseen by the Bank of International Settlements supported by their enforcers in the national intelligence agencies of the Western crime syndicate a.k.a. Genocide Inc. That massive global tax will then be applied to rolling out their New World Lockdown Order – the fascists’ big wet dream.
One more critical thing to consider when you are having to endure the propaganda and lies being spewed about anthropogenic CO2 is the following:
If they were really serious about reducing CO2 then the very first and easiest thing they could do would be to halt the still massive felling of rain forests. Yet they have made no serious attempt to do so. They falsely claim that it is not possible to stop felling of rain forests. DUH???
All that is needed to stop felling of trees in the rain forests is the deployment of swarms of drones to monitor the forests and whenever illegal felling of rain forest trees is observed then a serious burst of heavy machine guns from the drones would quickly eliminate the rogue pirates felling the trees. Indigenous natives felling a tree or two here and there would be given a free pass with systems in place to discern them with human oversight of all drone activity. The fact that there has never been any real serious attempt to stop the felling of the rain forests is all the evidence one should need to know that the whole climate change agenda is a total scam – end of section.
One other fact in the mix. You never hear or read any of the CO2 climate change propagandists ever talking about the much more toxic and deadly emissions coming from industrial flue stacks, most notably the enormous tonnages of mercury and other deadly heavy metal vapors that are spewing every day from flue stacks worldwide, especially from coal-fired plants. Mercury is in the air all around us and we are ingesting it with every breathe and that mercury is cumulative – mercury once it enters the human body does not get expelled it is absorbed into fat tissue. Unlike CO2 which can be remediated, mercury and other vaporized heavy metals cannot be easily remediated by the planting of trees.
I can also assure you (because it was my area of specialty working in industrial energy efficiency) that there are technologies available to eliminate all those heavy metals from industrial flue emissions but it is not adopted because the profit-driven corporate bean counters refuse to spend on anything that does not deliver very quick ROI. If those heavy metals were to be eliminated then there would be corresponding huge drop in the CO2 emissions. Space precludes me from detailing how exactly that works but I can assure it does – it has to do with a massive drop in dew point temps of the flue gases which condenses out the heavy metals and results in dramatically reducing the volumes of flue gases and the CO2 emissions contained in them.
So please give up the fervent religious crusade to convince me that CO2 is threatening human existence. The only thing that is threatening the existence of most human beings who are not part of the exclusive club, is the Deep State dark forces who are hellbent on locking the world down and turning us into their vassal debt-slaves. The CO2 terror campaign is based on nothing but fictions and lies and is one of their primary weapons they have deployed against all the cowering believers.
Once again Allan says it like it is.
My earliest suspicions that global warming (which morphed on to climate change) were the telegraphed taxes that would apply, East Anglia University caught twice committing fraud (15-20 years ago) with their garbage modelling, and banks still willing to finance sea side constructions of everything from houses to mega civil projects.
But the mindless masses gobble this shit up with same veracity that they drank the Sars scamdemic Kool Aid.
The biggest threat to humanity are the dumbed down masses.
Allan Mountain says
Spot on grr
the masses have to wake up to themselves and shoulder the part they have been playing by their own willingness to believe without question everything they are force-fed.
And almost all new green technologies actually produce more emissions than the old ones.
Alex Thrace says
Yes more CO2 = more green plants, therefore Green Technology!
Carbon is the Mark of the Beast.
6 protons, 6 neutrons, 6 electrons
Cool observation 😉
But how many would note this beast is quite harmless, at least in comparison with the Real Beast 686 (6p+8n+6e aka C14) — quite deadly even to Carbon itself as it decays into N14
See my post “What if?”
The experts etc never ever talk about the on-going stratospheric aerosol injections. You think there is a clamp down on Covid. The gag order on these aerosols is HUGE!
Well said Mr. Mountain! Well said!
“It” all comes back to one thing: the Road to Serfdom. And that’s been facilitated by Ignorance, which can be traced back to ownership of Academe and Education in general in the West by this Cabal.
The most effective weapon in their arsenal is that they are Patient. (See also Fabian Socialism)
Thank you mate.
“One can argue” but “cannot argue that human industrial carbon emissions do not contribute to warming”
She does https://phzoe.com/2021/02/06/greenhouse-gases-are-coolants/
Wizard Glick says
Keep drinking that Kool-aid…..
You are correct
” …. but you literally cannot argue that human industrial carbon emissions do not contribute to warming. ….
One not only can one must argue that carbon dioxide released through human activities (CO2 in itself a compound without which life wouldn’t exist), contributes zilch, nothing, nil to the climatic changes the earth has been going through since its formation.
Every human activity that discharges CO2 – cooking, flying, steel bashing, driving or any other – contributes not 40% not even 14% but merely 4% of the aggregate release of the gas. it’s close to marginal.
To blame people for wealth creation using fossil fuels that brought about an unimaginable degree of comfort for billions that our predecessors couldn’t even dream about is close to criminal, could only be advanced by someone harbouring hatred to the world’s great unwashed.
Moreover, how could anyone sane believe that an increase of CO2 in the air from 0.02% to 0.04% over more than 300 years could engender life as we know it beggars belief. The climatic changes are the function of the universe, it’s weather that’s the function of the planet, at some point in the future, hopefully before we commit suicide following the Green imbecility prescription, we will regret falling for it.
Watch Tucker, he sums it up beautifully (it begins at 2min16sec):
homer d says
None of the prophesied disasters that have been predicted by the global warming crowd since the 70’s have come to pass, so how many times can they shout wolf and expect to be taken seriously? Just google the predictions staring from the late 70’s. Look at the weather/climate data from the last century. Look at the newspaper reports of heat waves from the 30’s. The history does not support the cult. Wind and solar are intermittent and unreliable and would disappear without government giving them endless subsidies. The sheep may have short memories, but the sheepdogs don’t. If the global warming crowd had a winning track record or a batting average above zero, they might have some credibility.They have made a lot of money, hell of a scam.
martin mkultra7 says
“You cannot argue that human industrial carbon emmisions do not contribute to warming”.You are asking us to prove a negative!Talk about impossibilities!
A A Ron says
Uh, ZT, “carbon molecule”? Is that now “the science”?
“but you literally cannot argue that human industrial carbon emissions do not contribute to warming”
There is ZERO proof that it does. AL Gores lies are not proof.
ZT, nice try, but the ‘settled science’ battle-cry doesn’t rally the troops anymore.
The theory that the rise in atmospheric carbon levels after the Industrial Revolution drives ‘anthropogenic climate change’ (formerly ‘man-made global warming’) is non-falsifiable, just like ‘gender theory.’
That means belief in ‘man-made climate change’ is nothing to do with science, but instead is a cult … like gender theory, ‘Russian aggression’ or the belief that wearing a loose cloth face covering will stop the spread of respiratory viruses.
(Masking and Russian aggression aren’t as perfectly analogous to climate change as is gender theory, because they are falsifiable and indeed have been falsified, though both cults retain many stubbornly irrational followers.)
That is, in fact, why the activists ditched the term ‘global warming.’ Warming is measurable, and thus falsifiable. About the turn of the century, just as the warm-mongers hit their stride politically, the atmosphere stopped warming for nearly two decades – even taking into account NOAA’s and others’ well-known fraudulent manipulation of temperature measurement to promote their agenda.
Furthermore, as far as we can tell from ice-core, tree-ring samples and other physical evidence, Earth was warmer during three prior historic warm periods than it is now: the Minoan, Roman and early medieval warm periods. Back in pre-industrial times, CO2 was a trace gas with a concentration of about 280 parts per million. Today, it is still VERY MUCH a trace gas. It has not quite doubled, it’s about 420 ppm.
The assertion that the increase in concentration of a trace gas from nearly nothing to not-quite-twice nearly nothing is physically and chemically preposterous, especially in a system as heavily buffered as Earth’s atmosphere.
I’m sorry I didn’t have the time or interest to read your reference, which appears to be a children’s introduction to critical thinking and logical fallacies. Presumably a climate-change cultist wrote it. This highlights another parallel between the climate and gender cults: How crucial it is to indoctrinate children before they get old enough to develop a healthy skepticism and a distrust of predatory adults.
ZT: Sounds like a very good recommendation there — The Fallacy Detective — that quite a FEW here could obviously use.
Stephen Maloney says
With ECS ~1.5-1.25, GHG (natural and anthropogenic) correlate with 50%) warming correlates with solar windspeed which varies over multiple decades.
The last warming phsse was from ~1930- ~2010.
The Sun is entering a ~40-yr weakening phase marked by planetary cooling and weakening of the polar vortex.
Peak temperature recorded by NOAA UAH satellite data was in 2016 and already in decline.
Citations to the peer-reviewed physics literature available.
If you are going to pretend to be a physicist, you should base your claims on the current physics literature.
NOT a pop science book available at Amazon.
Biswapriya Purkayastha says
Your comment about Mengele is a bit unjustified. Mengele was far from the unprincipled monster he was made out to be; he’s been turned into a stand in for all the medical experiments conducted by the nazis on camp inmates, the vast majority of which he had absolutely no connection with. In fact a great number of the most sadistic experiments (William Shirer reports some of them in “The Rise And Fall Of The Third Reich”) were performed on Soviet PoWs, something that is conveniently omitted from the narrative, and Mengele in Auschwitz had no access to PoWs at all. Mengele’s “experiments” have also been rather, shall we say, exaggerated in the popular mind; a lot of his research was actually mainstream at the time and he spent a great deal of effort fighting typhus.
In the meantime, isn’t it rich that nobody in the West mentions the Japanese Unit 731 at all? They made the worst of the nazis look like benevolent angels, and they all got jobs in American institutions after the war was over.
Watch out where you are going there boss!
The knives will be out for you.
This is exactly the kind of subject that must come to light and be debated without repercussions in order to settle these scores.
In my opinion these taboo subject have to be rectified before USA can ever get on a positive track.
Otherwise it ain’t gonna happen people!
Now we are on the cusp of a civil war in the USA, no question. Damnedest thing is the people don’t even know who the enemy is!!!!!
Go figure that shit.
“Now we are on the cusp of a civil war in the USA, no question. Damnedest thing is the people don’t even know who the enemy is!!!!!”
You’re certainly right about that.
And the vague abstractions that people use to name the enemy is why blightwingers aim big, miss wildly, and have been getting their asses kicked (even when they “win”) for the past 60 years.
Mengele and his ilk will never look like angels to me, no matter how bad the comparator. He was a hack who injected children with diseases then killed and dissected them, or cut their eyes out and sent them to other freaks. He must have enjoyed his later years doing abortions in Argentina.
NIH has done some heinous research on children in the US, too.
Biswapriya Purkayastha says
Mengele doesn’t have to be an “angel”; it just needs to be said that he is not the personification of all the evil of the nazi regime as he is made out to be.
Allan Mountain says
What madness swirls round in your delusional world reconstructions?
Putting aside your comments about Soviet and Japanese atrocities what you wrote there about Dr Mengele has to rate as the worst rubbish ever posted to these comments.
There are countless recorded / documented testimonies of victims of Dr Mengele’s horrific experiments
Take you pick from these links
Biswapriya Purkayastha says
Your links are all the claims of people, decades after the event, who had already been ingrained with the idea that Mengele was the fount of all Auschwitz evil.
Anyone who has read the fascist, racist, plagiarist and liar Elie Wiesel’s book “Night” has seen the place where Wiesel (who would go on to justify the mass murder of Palestinians) claims, on arrival at Auschwitz in the middle of the night, to have recognised Mengele doing selections (in the same scene he claims to have seen Jews being burnt alive in a trench, a claim quietly dropped from all accounts of Auschwitz including Lawrence Rees’ book on the camp). One night ask how he – someone who’d just arrived – would know who Mengele was, but he also describes Mengele as tall, blond and blue eyed. Mengele was swarthy, black haired and of medium height as anyone who’s ever seen a photo of him can confirm. Other inmates recall Mengele talking to them in Hungarian, a language he couldn’t speak. And yet these people’s statements are given full weight to this day.
Apart from which there is a simple question: if Mengele was really that murderously sadistic, how come so many of his alleged victims survived to talk about his crimes 50 years later?
Meanwhile, you might try reading “Mengele” by David Marwell for details on the real man.
martin mkultra7 says
Biswapyra,you are no better than the ruling elete.You are fabricating to support your view.Menegela couldn’t speak Hungarian?Ihave never met one European that was not multiligual.They all can speak the language of at least their adjoining countries.
Biswapriya Purkayastha says
Mengele literally could not speak Hungarian. Two other Auschwitz doctors could, but not Mengele: he needed an interpreter to talk to Hungarians. This is something attested to by, literally, several anti Mengele people. This also means that anyone who says Mengele talked to them in Hungarian is confusing him with other Auschwitz doctors.
Did you even know Auschwitz had more than one doctor? Mengele was never even the chief medical officer there. He had to follow orders, same as everyone else. He couldn’t just slaughter anyone he felt like.
Galileo’s last word before he was burned to the death, immortalized on his tomb, “And yet the Earth moves!” I pray that God has mercy on us and removes evil from the highest places and we don’t have to prove that the Earth moves at the expense of our own lives.
I don’t think Galileo was burned to death.
Sentient -Sorry, Bruno was burned, Galileo was publicly humiliated and died under house arrest from what like a stress induced heart attack…
Well Bud get your facts straight for gosh sakes before you take up space here where the adults are having a serious discussion.
No, he was not burnt at the stake.
He died at home at the age of 77, about 8 or 9 years after his trial.
After a touchy encounter with the Roman Inquisition he was placed under house arrest in his home just outside of Florence. For someone about 70 years old, with very bad eye sight (blind?) and arthritis or rheumatism, this was probably not a serious sentence. He did manage to publish one or two books while under house-arrest though he did take the sensible precaution of publishing in Amsterdam.
Galileo was a brilliant researcher but poor politician. He managed to alienate any number of former allies including Pope Urban VIII who thought he was being mocked and ridiculed in Galileo’s 1632 book. This left Galileo open to attacks by various rivals.
Galileo’s real problem when he was hauled before the Inquisition was that his heliocentric theory did “not” work. It predicted one ocean tide a day. Galileo lived his entire life in central Italy away from the sea, except, probably for visits to Venice. He just did not realize how bad an error this was.
Galileo and probably at least a half a dozen others in Europe were correct in supporting a helio-centric theory but the knowledge at the time could and did support an earth-centric theory as well or even a bit better than a helio-centric one. It would take, apparently, another century or more before there was enough evidence to really decisively “prove” the theory.
He might have gotten a clean bill of health if the theory had worked even reasonably well. An earth-centric versus helio-centric model of the universe was not a core Catholic tenet. The Church, if need be, could adjust its teachings there.
Even as it was, he was not convicted of actual heresy. I think it was “Grave suspicion of heresy”.
Charles E. Fromage says
I wish present day society (and particularly TPTB) would apply the same skepticism to “Green Energy” that they did to Galileo’s heliocentrism. After all, if you want to change a fundamental scientific (thus religious) belief held by humanity since the beginning of time and replace it with something new – the burden of proof should certainly be on you.
In that sense at least, the Catholic Church was correct in its demands on Galileo. Moreover, the church did not suppress his arguments.
Yet, we have been forced to accept the science behind “green energy” without any allowance for doubt
He was not burned, you confound with Giordano Bruno one century earlier.
Galileo died of natural causes at 77. He was never burned.
He would probably be horrified at the vast majority of modern idiots using his reputation for intellectual honesty as a cloak for their own arrogance, ignorance, and hostility towards the Christian faith.
Moishe Pippik says
Correction:Galileo died of heart failure at age 77. He was threatened with immolation at his trial and “admitted” his error to avoid an agonizing death.
Just a program note.
Kaz Dziamka says
Lika, as several commenters have already said, you don’t know what you’re talking about. You’re confusing Galileo with Bruno. Also, why should “God” have mercy on us? Did he have any on Galileo? Has he ever had any mercy on anybody? Why don’t you try to think logically for a change!
Kaz – didn’t I issue a correction?
Kaz, I issued the correction myself. And you are obviously a person of no class whatsoever who instead of discussing an issue at hand , jumps at people’s throats.
“God” may not have mercy for us. However, the ones we need to worry about is “those who play God”.
Just as “Those who played God” has declared Galileo to be wrong and punished him, the modern “those who play God” has created new genders, have created a new bible with rules that all humans must follow, has declared that there is but only one God and whoever dares to challenge its position must be divinely punished. All must worship and offer tribute to “those who play God”.
Fortunately, it seems that some logical thinkers may have gotten past that age, and start to challenge the righteousness of “those who play God”. Hopefully this time round, humans do manage to build a Tower of Babel that can unite against this modern “those who play God”.
Brendan Holleran says
Do you have to be insulting ?
You’re confusing him with Giordano Bruno, another Renaissance philosopher, mathematician, and astronomer who was burned in Rome’s Campo de’ Fiori square in 1600. The unholy Roman Catholic Church since its inception has been nothing but a bulwark for the status quo on Earth and dumbing down of its inhabitants for the last 2,000 years. The current chief prelate, Francis I, is another one. The bastard was on the verge of excommunicating anyone who dared challenge the official Covidian dogma. An alarming statistic that should let many boil with rage and others shiver with fear: Italy’s population has gone from about 61 million souls in 2019 to 58.8 million now…in just 3 years, nearly 2 million people less!!!! Oh, the funeral parlors are doing the dandiest business!! It is the only economic sector that is rapidly expanding!! The way I see it, I will pop open and drink a 60 Euro bottle of Valpolicella Amarone wine in celebration when Satan’s institution on the Tiber SOON comes tumbling down!!
That was said by Galileo a century after he died in 1730
John Rockwell says
This mass psychos permeating the globe since COVID ramped up is an effort, I believe, to destroy the social and moral fabric of society. In this state, you either belong to the group think, or, as you said, be the brave Galileo.
Allan Mountain says
No kidding John Rockwell – ain’t that the truth
There can be no doubt that they are in process and well along the path to destroying the social and moral fabric of society. If they can destroy the truth then it is mission accomplished.
The dark power has captured and taken control of all our governments and institutions.
Who could ever have believed that Stanford University would ever have engaged in launching a massive online censorship campaign to eliminate even facts they knew to be the truth because it might have caused people to be hesitant in getting jabbed with mRNA gene altering poisons or worse have persuaded them to be sensible and refuse the jabs.
The inimitable Matt Taibbi exposes the Stanford University higher learning censorship program.
From Zero Hedge today
“True Stories… Could Fuel Hesitancy”: Stanford Project Worked To Censor Even True Stories On Social Media
The opening paragraph reads as follows:
While lost in the explosive news about Donald Trump’s expected arrest, journalist Matt Taibbi released new details on previously undisclosed censorship efforts on social media. The latest Twitter Files revealed a breathtaking effort from Stanford’s Virality Project to censor even true stories. After all, the project insisted “true stories … could fuel hesitancy” over taking the vaccine or other measures. The effort included suppressing stories that we now know are legitimate such as natural immunity defenses, the exaggerated value of masks, and questions over vaccine efficacy in preventing second illnesses.
Mark J says
Bishop Vigano should be the pope:
Francis is a liberal new world order person. One world bank..totally all in on communism.
For the first tine in ~600 years… a pope retired… Benedict. There is the homosexual/pedo mafia..the fight over the control of the Vatican bank.
Do your math.
Russia…savior of the non sodomy west:
Lawrence Magnuson says
Typical Republican know-nothing pro-oil spiel. Though both parties protect oil and attack solar and wind. the Republicans take the lead, throwing snowballs on the Senate floor, etc.
The Model T was manufactured until 1928. A single look at it tells you all you need to about the technology.
30 years later we have a 327 fiberglass 1958 Corvette. A red one. Strangling the green effort from its inception was ignorant and fossil fuel based. Might have been a 2023 Corvette by now and who knows how smartly powered.
Larry is great on all sorts of military analysis and a fine instructor for that–clear and engaging expression always. He knows jack shit about what he was bloviating today with every oil-based canard offered without offering a single reason for advancing them.
F- Stick to what you know.
Larry Johnson says
Try dealing with facts and arguing them. I have a PhD comp field in International Economics. I most certainly know what I am opining about. I did not argue “pro-oil spiel.” The attack on oil by the Greens does not come with a sensible alternative that is good for the environment.
I have added a video by my friend, Mark Mills. Watch that and tell me what he gets wrong.
Right on, Larry. I have a Ph.D. as well, though, like you don’t put it out there, as many without those credentials are as bright, with the possible exception you replied to above. My areas are design and operations of complex systems, undergrad math, physics, grad work mostly math, still lots of physics. The bottom line on “green” is it doesn’t work, and doesn’t seem to be intended to work, just an excuse for more control.
Like gas stoves. Replace an 85% efficient heating system with electric, 60% efficient at gas use, and the stove is 95%. Simple physics. They want to replace 85% with low 50’s in efficiency. And sell you electric cars with no range, and less in winter, that take days to charge. The goal is to immobilize the populace, not save the planet.
From the “systems” perspective, “systems” never fail, and always work as designed. If you want to know what a “system” was designed to do, you only have to observe what it does. Our “system” was designed to transfer all wealth and control to a small elite few. How do I know? Because that is what it’s doing. Lawrence Magnuson seems incapable of seeing what is obvious before his own eyes.
I agree with Mac. When Civilization consisted of a few hundred million people, they used low-density energy sources: wind, sun, wood. Yes, but there was a lot of free land back then. As the population grew, civilization evolved and switched to higher energy density sources: coal, oil, gas, the nucleus of the atom. Today, only such sources can ensure the functioning of civilization. The green awakened are the new Luddites. They propose reversing progress not to immobilize 8 billion people. They want to reduce the population. That is their main goal.
Perfect nutshell! ‘The goal is to immobilize the populace, not save the planet’.
No Name says
Go get ’em Larry and Mac ! And while you’re at it, don’t forget to mention that most electricity is created by burning coal, oil, and natural gas – all fossil fuels ! So they (the “globalists”) are literally pushing to have fossil-fuel-driven “electric cars”. And as Mac points out, there are inefficiencies in converting those fossil fuels at the power plant and sending down the wires to charge those cars… losses that make it moot (and worse) compared to simply burning the fossil fuels themselves in cars without the losses.
Of course, one could have a nuclear-powered “electric car” too, but too many Three-Mile Islands, Chernobyls, and Fukushimas because of the ramp-up needed to power all transportation everywhere might not work out so well for the planet in the long run.
Electric cars are okay for whatever they’re worth. But they are not better for the environment than fossil fuel cars.
One last thing. Green energy won’t be able to make all the electricity needed based mostly on wind, solar, and hydro. Only ocean energy (waves, tides, currents) has the possibility of that… and only if people drive smaller vehicles, and drive significantly less. But somehow ocean energy is never in the discussion. I suspect that’s because it’s not really about “the environment” at all, but only for the “elites” to wage more power and control over the peasants, whom they really want to depopulate anyway.
Наталья Волкова says
Lawrence Magnuson argued with you using only his opinion. No facts presented in his now familiar western style ranting when wanting to argue the already lost cause.
Have a beautiful week dear sir. I believe your the son of the ‘New World Revolution”.
Stick to your guns Larry (sorry for the pun). Yoa (again) are 100% correct.
PS. we are now in the midst of a solar minimum (solar cycle 25), before long we will need all the global warming we can muster. Following that science just got interesting!!
Keep up the good fight Mate!
German spent 1000 million euros during 20 year for the “green transition”, yet they emit 3 more time CO2 per capita than the french with the nuclear.
Everything from the studies to the “solutions” is wrong with the apocalyptic climate church.
Esteemed physicist Harold Lewis is calling global warming the ‘most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen.’ Thousand of scientifics said the same since 20 years but they were censored.
Top Gum says
Going “green” is 100% a pure political agenda. Renewable energy is not sustainable at this moment and has a greater impact on the environment than for example nuclear power. Numbers don’t lie, like you showed already. But when you deal with corrupted and/or extremist politicians, you get exactly what Germany has. No wonder they have to rain so much propaganda on their own people to convince them to pay for that transition. It’s all about profits and a scam from the beginning. But it makes the Germans feel ok when paying much more for something that should be not that expensive in the first place.
Bazza McKenzie says
Actually it is pro-humanity rather than “pro-oil”, whereas the green scam is anti-humanity (except for the very affluent).
The mass of humanity has been (or is being in China, India, etc) lifted out of poverty through low-cost, reliable, concentrated energy — the very antithesis of what the green rorters provide. That is the reason China and India, in their own development, have ignored the pontifications of the west’s “green” masters, who have busily condemned their own societies to poverty and degradation (from which those masters are to be exempted).
Typical Republican know-nothing pro-oil spiel. — Lawrence Magnuson
Please, enlighten Philistines, such as Larry or myself, and tell us exactly how you plan to replace oil immediately (or thereabouts) with solar, wind, geothermal, hydro or nuclear.
On second thought, no, I won’t. My technical education and experience is in electrical power generation, specifically nuclear energy — my final exam was six hours long with twenty questions… Calculate the minimum mass and geometry of (a specific isotope) necessary to create a prompt criticality was question number twelve (show your work!).
So where do you expect to find all the BTUs necessary to replace oil and gas? How do you expect to manufacture all these “replacement” BTUs without oil? Where will you store these BTUs and make them available for easy transport?
Solar, great as long as the sun shines — some locations are better than others. Wind, same. Geothermal is where you find it — I know of a wonderful hot spring for sale, 140 miles northeast of Fairbanks, Alaska. Hydro, same.
Nuclear? Great source for constant and plentiful electrical generation, but how do we dispose of its high (and low) level wastes? Care to design a cask which can reliably contain high level wastes for 240,000 years? Got a geologically stable place to bury all this waste where groundwater cannot reach it?
Perhaps you’ve never stood on gantries high above spent fuel rod cooling pools thirty feet deep with circulation pumps which can never be shut off… It’s an eerily beautiful sight, a bright blue-green glow in the water around the rods is testament to the millions of nuclear reactions per second still ongoing within the cladding.
And what about accidents, say Three Mile Island, Chernobyl or Fukushima? Do you not realize that high levels of radiation from Fukushima are present on the US west coast? The entire Northern Pacific Ocean? Untold numbers of marine mammals washed up with classic signs and symptoms of radiation poisoning. Entire species virtually disappeared within a few years of the accident. Crickets in the media, oceanographers and other marine scientists remain curiously silent…
Not to mention, we use the most polluting kind of nuclear power because… light-water reactors provide the raw material for more nuclear weapons — plutonium. And in addition to its radioactivity, plutonium is highly toxic (micro-grams).
So please, enlighten us poor and unfortunate “Republicans” as to how, exactly, you plan to replace oil and gas within the next 5, 10, 15, 20 or 30 years. I’m damn tired of people who know nothing about power generation and the relationship between energy and modern civilization talking about climate change and sustainability.
Fine, let’s get rid of oil and gas, right now! I’m all in. After all, humans have existed for millennia without the conveniences of modern society — it’s “sustainable” and that’s the most important thing, right?
“…but how do we dispose of its high (and low) level wastes?”
Well Russia is working on it:
BN 800 (БН-800) reactor type at the Beloyarsk NPP
For the idea see also here:
Thanks for the links…
Beautiful and insightful addendum!
Fulano de Tal says
Lawrence, as you can see, people here know everything about everything. Not only about geopolitics but also about virus and vaxes, all kind of science …
You only need a PHD in International Economics.
The older I get, the more I realize Socrates was right: The more I learn, the less I know for certain. Fortunately, despite that, Larry allows me to occasionally post my lack of understanding for all to see.
I am grateful for all the other posters here, many of whom are obviously more knowledgeable than I on a wide range of subjects.
So what’s your story, slick? What are your areas of expertise?
Care to weigh-in with something other than a common, garden variety dismissal, which conveys no facts or logic to support your beliefs?
Please enlighten us… dazzle the rubes with your penetrating insights and wit.
harry G says
I’m presently reading Barbara Tuchman’s, A Distant Mirror about life in 14th C. Europe. Without oil/gas and associated products, our life may well approximate Europe of that era. I was a middling student in physics but I do understand the concept of “energy density”. Something missing with petroleum alternatives. Besides, our “green president” is prosecuting an illegal, moronic war in Europe that seems to be something short of a “green war”. In our new carbon free future does Doh! Bidet still get to have a Corvette? Thought so.
Tell my friends and neighbors here in the upper Midwest that they can’t go to Florida on carbon nasty jets in mid-winter and you’ll be tarred and feathered and run out of town. Said, with respect…
A note on (C)AGW
Just the facts about Earth CO2
When atmospheric scarcity of CO2 drops below ~150ppm, plants stop photosynthesis, which, in turn, would very quickly eliminate most of macroscopic life on Earth.
Earth atmosphere contains ~720Gt (Giga tons), while human activity contributes ~6Gt of that gas; world oceans contain ~3t.4Tt (37,400Gt) of this “suspended carbon”
Dry atmosphere is composed of N2 (78.1%), O2 (20.9%) and Ar (0.9%); due to rounding, there’s only ~0.043% left for all other gases of which the life-enabler (CO2) is about 0.042%, YES, for every 2,380 parts, there is ONE CO2; and, further, of that miniscule amount, only ONE in 120 of these said parts are product of humans — that is ONE IN 300 THOUSAND!
And then there is moisture. Well, close to zero over poles, but up to 3% over tropical regions. This moisture forms clouds which affect the Earth energy budget more than anything else in nature, save volcanic activity or eventual nuclear war.
Now, could any of the science geniuses behind the CAGW explain how could these tiny amounts of human produced CO2 molecules cause any change in the Earth energy budget? Especially, how could the IR radiation these molecules emit, at temperature (~193K ~-80degC -112degF) that is lower than anything encountered on Earth, warm up anything here?
Very creative analogy by the much respected proprietor of this site.
Now for the caveat: apply the same reasoning to 9/11 and the MASSIVE body of data tt contradict the Holohoax dogma that has been jammed down western man’s throats for, at least in my case, the last 60 plus years.
Wow, wow, wait, wait! The taboo subject, let’s not go there cowboy.
Well, I will tell you with certainty, there will be no fundamental change or hope for a resurgent west until that subject is looked at objectively and without the ever present possibility of ruin or violence directed at those challenging the status quo.
I am astonished that the United States military has been dominated, cohersed, and most likely blackmailed into accepting what happened to the American warship Liberty and criminally denying the outrageous negative influence that has hijacked Americans ability to think for themselves and the good of our country by a foreign criminal enterprise disguised as a free democratic state.
I live overseas for 35 years now but I am a son of the south that grew up with passionate patriotism.
Now with Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Serbia, COVID, the assassinations worldwide, regime change fiasco, and now Ukraine and the big risidual prise Russia, I have had it with USA. I quit USA and I hope to never go back.
They lost brothersJohnson, MacGregor, Ritter and many many others that get the point.
There are some good people in America but they will suffer the crimes of these nutcases.
Until they get fed up enough and look squarely in the mirror nothing can stop the ship from going down.
My little voice will not make a difference but I’m not going to be on that voyage to hell.
Better things to do.
In terms of being a “Galileo” I think it best to first consider some time-tested axioms. First, never engage a fool or an idiot, lest you join them in folly. That’s along the lines of not casting pearls before swine, and a corollary to “as a dog returns to his vomit, so does the fool to his folly.” Another, attributed to P.T. Barnum is that it’s easier to fool someone than it is to convince them they’ve been fooled. Generally it means take care in picking your battles, as the enemies of freedom and sensibility seem to have the advantage of superior numbers of inferior thinkers.
The general level of critical thought and intelligent discourse on this blog are very high, and most, if not all are out there trying to get various points across in order to at least preserve, if not improve upon our system. It’s tough, and worse than thankless as you get attacked, even by many who are friends and family. But we stick with it on principle and for the good of all.
Just about everyone here is a version of Galileo to some degree, and I salute all who are true heroes in some way. I know at time we feel more like Don Quixote as we tilt at the windmills of the rigid establishment. Blogs like this give us respite, and encourage us all on, as it offers glimmers of hope that we need to keep up the battle. A closing quote from Shakespeare: “lay on MacDuff, and damned be he who cries ‘hold, enough'”
Larry, I cannot believe the wildly unrelated issues you’re erroneously conflating here.
Climate change is observably VERY real and is very definitely an existential threat, something that has been recognized by the scientific community for decades now. It is not a “religion” of any sort, and bears no relation to the pseudo-philosophies of gender ambiguity with which you lump it.
Galileo based his conclusions on empirical observations, just as climate scientists have done for many years now. The “woke” nonsense you refer to, on the other hand, is anti-empirical, based not on observation but only on mere conjectures and politically oriented wishful thinking.
Climate scientists, including those at NASA, NOAA, and numerous climatological research institutes world-wide did not reach their fact-based conclusions by guessing, as neither did Galileo. They ARE ‘speaking truth based on evidence’!
Back your statements up with some facts. Here are some: deaths from climate events are down, so it destruction, food production is up, the planet is greener than at any time in history, the updated NOAA data show no warming, just to toss out a few. There is no climate crisis by any metric.
New research shows that the major driver of climate is the sun. We get bombarded with climate hysteria but not the facts. More and more scientists are taking issue with the climate agenda as the data doesn’t support the claims. Correcting for heat sinks (like places where open range was urbanized causing hot spots and the like) shows little change. We even see bizarre research claiming global warming will cause colder temperatures. Crazy stuff.
There is no climate catastrophe. We’ve been hearing that one for decades now. When I was a kid the warnings were of an impending ice age. Same scientists, different argument. They keep quietly parsing old predictions off web sites as time proves them grossly incorrect.
Here’s the simple check: in the past, CO2 levels were over 4,000 ppm, and it wasn’t the end of the world. How is 400 ppm now going to be the end of everything? If you can’t answer that one, you have nothing. Like the school science texts that say “in the past when the Earth was much warmer than it is today…” It’s been ice free at times, and almost covered at times. Guess what? Cold kills a lot more people than warm. Check the stats.
Care to substantiate these alleged “facts” of yours?
No? I didn’t think so.
“Back your statements up with some facts.
Open mouth, insert foot!
Same goes for the vast majority of the ignoramiscienti who’ve opined on this topic. While it’s been consistently reported over the last two decades that “7 or 8 of the last ten years have been the hottest on record globally”, the majority here want to insist that there is NO global warming.
Believe what you want then. I’m not going to waste my time trying to convince the “true UNbelievers”. (And I *can* make these claims based on authority, since I hold a BS in Environmental Studies.)
No, the “scientific community” is govt funded and based on censorship of thousand of real scientific that warned it was a false science.
Most other scientific simply repeat the propaganda of MSM without knowing a cents of the subject.
There is absolutely NO consensus in the domain, but if by mistake you criticize them you get the “complotist” flag and it’s over for your career.
The media always push catastrophic predication, mostly wrong, and NEVER the facts that are positive as the earth greening, the antarctic growing again, the healthy great coral reef etc. etc.
Brian O. says
Alas, climate change is caused by the whims of our Sun, proximity, phase, etc.
What we do have is a problem with pollution, and chemicals released into our waterways, the air, the soil, the food, etc.. The climate change crap has put the real problem on a back burner so ManBearPig can scream climate when he knows we are putting tonnes of toxic waste on every X amount of square miles. Whole parts of cities are built on land fill that never had restrictions, so the water every where around it is contaminated. Live near the military? Your water has been foul all your life. They won’t even acknowledge it. Still trust them to tell you the truth?
The government has only agendas. They needed a plague, so they created one. They need to distract from the collapse of our banks and the nation itself, they start a war and piss off literally everyone in the world in a desperate attempt to blame someone else.
The sacred agencies you mention are part of the woke. They get paid to say what they are told, we know they have no independence any longer. How many doctors that are part of the government stood up and told you that no vaccine is possible for a beta corona virus? Never been one before, never will be. The virus mutates faster than they could make anything that resembles the current version circulating. This has been known for over a century. But it is the perfect fraud and they made billions.
The Antarctic hasn’t melted. It was supposed to decades ago. If that changes it will be from the solar cycle. Our president appears to have been working for the Chinese government for years and being well paid.
You expect those below him to be less corrupt if their job depends on it?
Agree with all except Biden working for Chinese. Business is global. Ho’s take money where they get it and China is a major player.
Brian O. says
thank you, I was blinded there for a moment.
Can you power a 10 – 20 million people city with just solar energy?
What about industry?
Is there enough lithium in the world to build and replace all the cars in the world … or TRUCKS?
How long does it take to charge a simple electric car vs an oil fuel car? Do you have any idea about the gigantic lines on the future gas station?(turned into charging stations) because charging a battery takes from 4 – 24 hours.
What happen with the lithium battery once its life is over?
Do you know how much Tesla charges for a new battery (its about 20k, just like a brand new car for about 5 years of life).
Im not scientist but I can see clearly there’s a lot of fraud, wishful thinking, religion and histery about climate change and alternatives. And the most gullible victims are the medium class, because they lack common sense.
Alex Thrace says
The whole thing is a scam. The only case they have is “appeal to authority”
The “science” is the perfect example of GIGO – Garbage In = Garbage Out. Swallowed whole by the gullible who can’t figure out what bathroom to pee in and think men can have babies.
The same scientific community that told us the vax was ‘safe and effective’…
The same political elites that lie to us all the time.
The same media that lie about everything…
All pushing the same climate fear mongering but they must be telling the truth on this!
I’m not sure you actually know anything about ‘facts’. Facts can, and are easily manufactured to suit whatever agenda’s those in power choose. Precisely because it’s easy to manipulate low consciousness people of which you are a prime example.
Most of climate scientists’ empirical observations have to be “adjusted” using what is essentially guesswork to compensate for things like the heat island effect. 70% of the Earth’s surface is water, yet ocean temperatures only began to be systematically collected with the deployment in 2007 of the Argo Array of buoys, and that’s been complicated by ocean currents moving them about in not-entirely-predictable ways. The best overall measure of global temperatures is infrared satellite imagery, and that is the method that’s shown the least warming.
I doubt that Larry would categorically deny any/all warming, and his main point stands: the plan to shift from fossil fuels to solar and wind is laughably implausible and would be environmentally devastating. Sending pre-teens in the DRC down rickety ladders into the bowels of the earth to manually mine cobalt for batteries may make wealthy Westerners feel good about themselves, but it is evil.
There is no scientific community. They are all bought and paid for bullshitters. What we are witnessing are natural cycles of our solar system and our planet.
And those that bought the climate change lie are luddites who can not apply critical thinking. When you remove oil and gas from civilization. You are condeming 8 billion people to a slow death by starvation. Human muscle and animal muscle will never produce enough food or move enough food to feed that many people. The population will die back to what it was in 1820. With the advent of oil and gas. None of you who think wind and solar is the answer have a clue. Even tho the shutdown of Russian oil and gas gives you the answer today. Back away from the crack pipe.
Alex Thrace says
“Climate scientists, including those at NASA, NOAA, and numerous climatological research institutes world-wide did not reach their fact-based conclusions by guessing”
No guessing, they made it all up. Sold out for the almighty dollar as always.
Brüno Maier says
“the scientific community” Would that be the scientific community funded by big govt/WEF/UN/World Bank, or the other one, the independent one, ignored by the media, that receives no payments and can make real conclusions based on empirical evidence with no hidden masters twisting the facts and telling them what that science should be?
JMF has the exact same misguided conviction as the vaxtards and covidiots. They dribble diarrhea straight from the TV via their mouths.
Congrats! You win the Darwin Award.
martin mkultra7 says
JMF,what aload of horseshit!The climate has been changing on earth for as long as there has been an earth.The earth has been warming since the last ice age.It will continue to warm until the onset of the next ice age.You climate nuts need to have more patience,you will eventually get what you want.
Alex Thrace says
They are all now photography deniers. Compare photos from 100 years ago of coastal landmarks like lighthouses, the Statue of Liberty etc and li and behold, look at those water levels!
Top Gum says
People cannot change the climate, that is utter nonsense. What we see are forces of nature at work here. The climate changes over time. Things shift and balance themselves in periods of time. We are too small and to insignificant to make any change to those forces of nature. What people do is, they surely poison their environment and kill the natural balance of life within. We pollute the air, the water and the earth with our own “evolution” into a higher society and with the wars some countries wage over others (agent orange in Vietnam). Yes, we have the capacity to destroy life and our environment and in the end our-self as we are also exposed to them. But I doubt, we can make any significant change to the climate on this planet as we are just a drop in a bucket when compared to the forces of nature at work at all times.
It’s all about money and profits. It has noting to do with climate and/or protecting the environment. It’s just greedy people that want to have it all for nothing. They don’t care, they use every possible hoax they can make us believe in so they can take/steal our money legally and get richer.
Depends on what you mean by “people”. Some “people” can indeed change the climate via weather modification programs which have been on-going since at least the 1980s. And yet not one person in 100 has an idea of what is going on right above their heads.
You talk about brain-washing. Even “people” on this comments section don’t get it.
Observation itself is far from enough to define objective truth. What I observe every day is that Earth is not round. When I was in Alberta Canada, it was obvious that the Earth was flat. Now, in Ontario, it does not seem flat at all. It is hilly. But not round, by no means, it is fully observable. My observation must be correct, I have no interest in any of “flat or round” camps. If my observation shows that Earth is round, I will take it truth. Seeing pictures in books is not good, clever propaganda can insert whatever they want. See, the first photos of earth came from came from Russian made space vehicles. And the very first of them were operated – by dogs. So dogs took pictures of round earth? Who would believe it? Then a human, Gagarin, went to space and he too took snapshots. Yet, I believe my eyes and my observation. The Earth cannot be round. It could be Russian propaganda.
As for global warming, it has been six months since I saw it last. It was -18 Celsius last night. No global warming observed.
Please bugger off
John Merryman says
Well, how about we elect someone who did stand up?
How about an Assange for President write-in campaign?
Imagine the bumper stickers and tee shirts;
He looked the Beast in the eye and didn’t blink.
They can drink the hemlock, get nailed to the cross, burned at the stake, shot, thrown in jail for life, but history does not forget.
They want to make him an example, so turn him into a martyr.
Otherwise we have a repeat of the deranged clown, versus the demented puppet.
Unless Rand Paul and Tulsi Gabbard run as a cross party ticket.
What the UK,. Sweden and the US etc have done to Assange was looking back the start of the end of any freedom in the West.
And how many of us make it an issue? We all sheeple talking safely from computers so we can keep our own grip on reality.
If Assange runs for President, I will support him. He has proven to a man who speaks the truth, and I can’t say that about anyone else on Capitol Hill.
*Proven to be a man who speaks the truth.
Julian is Australian, not born in the USA either, and so can never be president of the USA.
Oh hang on, that didn’t stop Barrack the Kenyan.
Cliff (Bishkek) says
Larry, I love your analysis. But you have one glaring fault – the ability to enter emojis on some of the comments presented here which in many cases are just absolute balderdash without facts or actually people presenting replies without facts.
Maybe I need to design an emoji which allows me to present my thoughts in “good old Australian country bar room and paddock language”.
Alex Thrace says
Not to worry about the lithium supply being stressed by wide adoption of EV’s. It won’t be an issue since the goal is NOT to put us all in EVs but to get out our of personal transportation altogether.
The plan is to make personal transportation- that is freedom to travel- too impractical and expensive for the riff-raff. (us)
The elites will still have their, Suburbans, Range Rovers and Gulf Stream jets. The rest of us will be taking the bus. If we’re lucky.
The few of us that will be able to afford a car in the newly planned world of 15-minute cities [ also known as concentration camps] will find that a car that is connected enough to download Spotify and remotely unlock the doors with your phone, can also be controlled as to where, when and how far you can take it.
Hspoen to have missed your 14th booster? Possibly you inadvertently misgendered something in a Facebook post? Maybe you ate one too many climate destroying cheese-burgers this month? Sorry, no driving for you except to the local Whole Foods where your Fed Digital Dollar card will buy you a delicious and nutritious cricket loaf ( and nothing else) .
Your EV will do as commanded and NOT by you.
That is what it really is about.
I remember during the various fake 70’s oil crisis, you could hear the chattering idiots yap non-stop about how we must “end America’s love affair with the automobile”.
Well, they finally figured out how to do it. Turn your car from an instrument of your freedom to travel to your 4 wheeled prison guard.
And they have the sheep begging for it. The Rape of the Minds is well underway.
Yup. But the sheep never get it. Too bedazzled to look a bit deeper and see every problem has it’s exploiter and man are the West exploiting this one.
Gender dysphoria is a real mental condition. Denying gender exists not the solution. Environmental damage is a real problem. Banning all fuel cars is not the solution.
k. talaat says
Instead of calling them sheep, help them come to the light, first by showing respect and compassion to their condition. Working two jobs leaves no time for reflection. Help them.
Alex Thrace says
“Gender dysphoria is a real mental condition.”
True but the solution is mental health care not cutting some poor kids penis off or doing a double mastectomy on a 14 year old girl.
This is what passes for science in leftie America.
k. talaat says
Who is behind this Gender muddle up.
k. talaat says
The goal is to reduce our wealth by reducing energy and nutrition which in turn will reduce our freedom.
All these European Malthusian Communits, inbred lines, care about is continuing their self delusion of being the Chosen. Their self bestowed sense of despotism, justifies their exploitation of the planet and to do so they must deceive us. Anything coming out of the WEF or the newly appointed Tony Bliar is pure deception.
Mankind is moving from fire as energy to light and eventually to gravity. Evolution takes its time.
Yep you got it.
Brian O. says
My comment was not meant to say that all cause heat generation on our planet is not adding to the total, but it is a minimal amount that is outside our control. Agencies that need to pad their budget every year to get more funding have to convince the money people that they have something worth while or desired by someone at a higher level. As vice president, ManBearPig started to cash in on the mood of voters. And darn if we haven’t gone in to a warming trend. It’s either a bit warmer or a bit colder.
The study takes centuries, perhaps even eons and Galileo only started 400+ years ago.
Give it time. We have a lot more to worry about in present tense. The BS artists that sell the next meme.
k. talaat says
The Bolshevick Neocons say we should kill everyone over there before they fight us over here.
I am willing to be a Galileo and say we need to neutralize the Bolshevick Neocons over here before everyone fights us over there.
Hummmm . . . yaasss.
If one looks out the back door and sees some nefarous fellow sloshing kerosene all over one’s barn, how long must one wait before acting? When he obviously strikes the match? What if he moves too quickly?
Know what? You have asked an existential question about America, our culture, our Constitution, and its prevailing (perverse) interpretation, and serious, probing thought and discussion among mutually respectful adults is way overdue on this.
Thanks to you, Larry, and do keep on keepin’ on, and thanks too to k. talaat.
I don’t think Larry’s point is that humans have no effect on the environment.
It is a narrower and very valid point. That the solutions to human impact are economically driven and likely to cause harm outside US borders in particular the forced push to secure limited resources like lithium. Which by the way take a lot of oil to get.
So a fact of human impact on environment or natural warming (there user to be an ice age around here) is being exploited to make profit based on fear without allowing people to question the METHOD through which an intended result is achieved.
It is similar to tran issues and covid issues in the sense that huge money is thrown at this, very little if any hard questions from an onboard political class.
Anyone who is familiar with academic research knows who funds it and that in the West little is objective in academia.
I remember sitting in the Oxford and Cambridge Club on Pall Mall 20 years ago and listening to a middle aged scientist patiently explain to me why global warming was a hoax by showing me data of historical trends and periods in which the earth was closer to the sun in it’s cycles.
Now the science is debatable. There is also no question humans harm the environment by polluting it, plastic,, destroying nature etc bad. There is also global greening which no one talks about. Ok.
But this article requires deeper thinking than primary school level. It requires looking at what solutions are being offered, what is peddaled as fact and where there is some substance.
All green energy solutions in West favour the rich. All of them. Tax subsidies are huge. the electric car js a con. Right now industry can’t run on batteries. Nor can heavy machinery. Nor can fighter jets.
In the South the initiatives are more basic like banning plastic bags in Kenya, cleaning water and restoring reefs in Asia. All sensible stuff. Meanwhile UK tips untreated sewage into the oceans, dumps toxic rubbish in Africa and the Thames is toxic but it wants electric cars.
The only impactful policies in West was Canada’s tree planting initiative which was massive and paid students a good buck. Saving environment a good thing, not cutting Amazon and killing the tribes that one it a good thing, but who talks about not building houses out of wood?
So. Anyone want to talk about this focus on electric cars and the science behind it? Larrys point is more complex than some of the comments.
Most of the world homes are made out of brick & motar. It’s only in cold areas or jungles that there is enough wood to build homes .
If South Asia started using toilet paper instead of water to wash their ass all the world’s forests will disappear in a few years.
Behind the bricks and mortar outside walls (and under the roofs) are frames made with mostly timber, lesser numbers with steel.
k. talaat says
The slabs and roofs are made out of Reinforced Concrete.
Americans build the best skyscrapers in the world and they build homes without any vernacular considerations.
Timber framing in earthquake prone California with plenty of timber resources makes good sense. Timber framing in huricane plagued Florida is stupid, but it is faster and cheaper. Why they keep doing it? Because insurance companies charge a percentage over their payouts. No incentive to cut the amount of payouts. Nothing makes since in the USA. We have to kill the Lobby System.
Solar Vortex says
I like Copernicus and there is nothing new under the Sun regarding human stupidity.
It is the end of the line for smoke and mirrors deception across the spectrum because they aren’t meant to last forever.
The new climate global religion will feature indulgences and heretics along with a carbon credits exchange to go with your CBDC bugs and pods.
An excellent book which debunks the “science” of human-caused global warming is Unsettled, by Steven E. Koonin, a prominent scientist (a physicist). Highly recommended.
Louis Hissink says
Yup, I sure am!
To date I have survived a few acts of cancellation by the wokies, and these days prefer to do a Copernicus rather than a Galileo. As for “climate”, that’s a terminological artefact or abstraction since it is based on the statistical averaging of weather data over an arbitrary period of 30 years.
Scientifically 3 degrees Celsius plus 3 degrees Celsius equals 3 degrees Celsius.
I.E. 3 + 3 = 3.
If we are adding mass, then 3Kg + 3Kg = 6 Kg.
Temperature is an intensive variable. Mass is an extensive variable. Intensive variables cannot be counted.
You need to understand the difference between intensive and extensive variables to explain why climate modelling is intrinsically problematical and this woke.
Rapunzel Rapunzel Let Down your Hair says
I suggest you come down to Earth from your ivory tower and leave your 3 + 3 = 3 intrinsic vs extrinsic grab bag of gobbledegook back up in the clouds where they belong, your highness.
Louis Hissink says
Cursors, (:-))-last sentence should be ‘and thus woke’.
Thanks for adding a new perspective.
I surmise you CC deniers think all those peer-reviewed scientific journals are part of the ‘conspiracy’ so you wouldn’t bother to submit your own article for review or make a presentation at a conference? Well, I assure you the real scientific community – people who have dedicated lifetimes to study in their fields – would simply LOL and move on to the next submission. This article is unworthy of the author’s esteem and he needs to educate himself to dispell his prejudice. Rather than rehashing specific issues in this blog, I suggest the skepticalscience.com website is a good place to begin.
Bazza McKenzie says
Nowadays “the real (cough) scientific community” consists of people who have dedicated their lifetimes to publishing what government officials want published, in order to retain their jobs and get grants.
Precisely the same as the supposed medical scientists who, in order to continue in their jobs and lucrative grants, published precisely what Fauci and Pfizer required published. Relevant to that, virtually all medical journals now are absolutely dependent on big pharma advertising and do not publish things harmful to their advertisers’ interests.
Well, I’m hardly a Galileo and even further from a DaVinci but I found a fascinating read the other day showing evidence that DaVinci was the son of an Italian father and a Circassian (Abkhazia, Southern Ru) slave mother.
The climate has not warmed in 15 years and is actually getting cooler.
Brüno Maier says
Galileo pulled a Colin Powell UN speech (when he knew there were no weapons of mass destruction) and recanted his scientific findings in front of the Roman inquisition.
Giordano Bruno was espousing the same solar system concepts, but refused to recant in front of the inquisition, and was burned at the stake.
Larry I am disappointed, because I enjoy your geopolitical views, on your broad brush take on climate change. Climate change in itself is a huge problem. It is what is fueling a good deal of immigration world wide. Drought in Central America is a good part of why our border is being overrun.
Climate change is real and needs to be addressed. How that is done is the question.
Both the above men would have backed the existential nature of climate change, because they were scientists. The science is clear. Humans have been dramatically effecting the earth’s environment. We have cut 70% of forests and reduced all biomas (life) by 50% in last 5000 years.
There is a strong relationship between co2 levels and temperature over last 800000 years. At the current co2 levels the average temperature of earth will likely be 4-5 degrees higher than pre industrial. We can’t grow enough grains at those temperatures to keep this party going.
To me this is like nuclear war, it is existential. It is not a religion. How you approach dealing with it can be a religion. Personally the current approaches are just moving the deck chairs. Consumption needs to be reduced.
Larry Johnson says
Do you not understand that Climate Changes? Do you really believe that nations can alter climate? Please explain.
I can't remember the name I chose. says
“Do you really believe that nations can alter climate?”
Of course they can,… and have.
The hydrochlorofluorocarbons such as the refrigerant Freon had such a bad effect on the planet that its manufacture and use has been globally banned since 1989.
Such chemicals when released into the atmosphere catalyze the breakdown of ozone.
Their continued use would have quickly destroyed all life on the planet by destroying the ozone layer.
The ozone holes over the poles are still there 35 years after the ban.
The size of the southern ozone hole stabilized around 2000.
However, the size of the hole 2020-2022 is about as large as it has ever been.
If you are not publishing the comment where I claim that
If both the Greenland, and Antarctica ice sheets melt, sea-level will rise 80 meters.
because you don’t believe this to be the case, then have a look at the U.S. Geological Survey report from one of these links
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs2-00/ or http://preearth.net/pdfs/USGS-sea-level-and-climate.pdf
One finds that;
The Greenland ice sheet melting will raise sea-level 6.55 meters (21.5 feet),
the West Antarctica ice sheet melting will raise sea-level 8.06 meters (26.4 feet),
the East Antarctica ice sheet melting will raise sea-level 64.8 meters (212.6 feet),
and all other ice melting will raise sea-level 0.91 meters (3 feet).
So, you agree that in Netherland livestock should be cut 50% as well as farm fields (about 3000)to comply with the green agenda?
Do you really know what it means? Famine, in other words HOLOCAUST.
Oh, wait … there is an alternative: EAT BUGS.
I can't remember the name I chose. says
Global Warming poses an existential threat.
Global Warming poses a very serious threat to Russia and China (and others including Florida which will disappear altogether).
Check out this map which shows how much land the world will lose due to global-warming.
Here is another map where the “to be flooded” areas are marked in red.
The world will lose these areas over centuries, and the full effect will not occur for millennia.
How long depends on how hot the idiots let it get.
The truth is that it is probably too late to stop the Greenland ice sheet melting.
This is due to the fact that the Greenland ice sheet is a long way from the north pole, and as the top levels of the ice sheet melt they are exposed to even warmer air which melts them further,…. A vicious cycle.
The Greenland ice sheet melting will add 7 meters to the current sea level.
If both the Greenland, and Antarctica ice sheets melt, sea-level will rise 80 meters.
You might want to read the article the maps come from;
And this is only sea level rise. There are many other huge problems that come with Global Warming.
Larry Johnson says
You are a prime example of this insanity and lack of logic. Which is it? GLOBAL WARMING? CLIMATE CHANGE? GLOBAL COOLING? You can’t even keep your story straight.
80 meters? 262 feet? LOL
Yes, 80 meters, 262 feet. says
If both the Greenland, and Antarctica ice sheets melt, sea-level will rise 80 meters.
See the U.S. Geological Survey report from one of these links;
One finds that;
The Greenland ice sheet melting will raise sea-level 6.55 meters (21.5 feet),
the West Antarctica ice sheet melting will raise sea-level 8.06 meters (26.4 feet),
the East Antarctica ice sheet melting will raise sea-level 64.8 meters (212.6 feet),
and all other ice melting will raise sea-level 0.91 meters (3 feet).
I don’t doubt that if all the ice in Antarctic melted, the ocean would rise that much. I doubt that all the ice in Antarctica will melt. More importantly, the prescriptions of the warming-obsessed (wind and solar, coupled with electricity-consuming transportation and appliances) cannot be accomplished. If they were advocating greater use of nuclear power (including thorium reactors), I’d take them more seriously.
‘as it was in the days of Noah’ eh?
k. talaat says
Yes, 80 meters, 262 feet…
where does the change of temperature occur? Do you even know that it changes very drastically around the Equatorial Belt. Above and below the Equatorial Belt the temperature varies up and down from year to year 1 that is one degree. The AC in your room varies 2 degrees.
Please give us a brake and find another religion, preferably one where science isn’t a God.
Larry, I suppose I should note that one of the hats I wear is an atmospheric scientist; my funding is a combination of gov’t grants and big oil companies, and I run a small company. I also do environmental health and delved deep into the medical literature on the pandemic. I found nearly zero correlation between what was in the MSM and what was actually written in the peer-reviewed literature. For example, I recall that on page 42 (I think) of the Pfizer FDA application was reported that they eliminated from the study group anyone who had any health issues or developed any. Another study said they hypothesized the effect of the vaccines lasted 6 months, but only studied them for 1.5 months, it was widely reported as lasting 6 months. The data I found pointed straight toward a false narrative being sold to the public. I am in 95% agreement with you on this topic.
Climate- change, though I am only half in agreement. If not for the CO2 inw the atmosphere, the earth would be a frozen ball of ice (Physics 101). This has been increasing in the last few hundred years due to human input. Eventually, this will lead to warmer temperatures (again, Phys101). When is the question, due to the enormous thermal damping of the oceans and the radiative effect of clouds. My personal view is that it is the methane (growth driven by fracking) driving the short-term “climate” changes that are being observed in the satellite data, particularly at the Arctic. But it’s not easy for the climate NGOs to admit they targeted the wrong gas (and there are good economic reasons (win-win) to reduce methane, So not with you here.
In any case, fossil fuels are a limited resource; most of the easy oil is gone, whereas solar (or fusion) is not limited – there will be a transition (to reach the Star Trek, not Blade Runner future). The transition could be handled rationally, but it is more like the insane asylum is running the show. Or chicken without a head. Or (HT to S. Ridder), a drowning person is striking out.
The storage problem remains after 50 years of investment. I wouldn’t put a lithium battery on the wall of my house if Tesla paid me (a batt fire burnt my hybrid to the tires). The grid (which is falling down) requires trillions of dollars of investment to transition to decentralized production without widespread rolling blackouts, yet there are no investments. Napkin-level calculations show there is not enough lithium being mined or cobalt per year by orders of magnitude, etc.
It’s going to be a shit show (again, with you 100%).
This is all a serious shame because it could have been different:
1. There are very good economic ($$) reasons for solar and wind in many applications (not all).
2. Ivermectin could have saved millions (but hurt big Pharma profits).
3. The US grid is going to collapse (and god help us if there is a Carrington event), as with all US infrastructure, its D-. Even an intense solar storm that takes it down – and it should have been hardened – would not have been very expensive.
It’s not drought that’s driving people to US it’s the agricultural subsidy of nearly 400 billion a year to large corporations who dump agricultural produce in Central America at cheaper rates than the unsubidised farmer there can produce.
The reason India went from chronic Famines under British to a position of not only feeding it’s 1.4 billion population without importing food but also becoming an occasional exporter in large quantities of produce.
Just 50 years back 90% of India couldn’t afford even 100 ml milk daily for it’s children. Today we are overflowing with milk and our population has increased five times 80 years since independence from UK.
We have so much grain acquired and stored by government that millions of tons rots every year because prices going down can result in farmers producing less.
Also because 20-30 years after independence in 1947 India used to beg for rice and wheat feed it a people. The historical memory makes the govt keep on hoarding essential cereals even when it’s way beyond the amount necessary.
Central American rural economy has been devasted by dumping of corn by American corporation and American companies owning farms or contracting farms for commercial crops to export to US.
This is the reason India has a very strict export as well as import regime as far as, food is considered. US has been hammering India to gain access to it’s agricultural sector for decades to no avail.
That’s an interesting comment. In the same geographical area people should notice what happened to Sri Lanka after the West imposed their green agenda.
“Sri Lanka’s Green New Deal Was a Human Disaster
An ill-advised national experiment in organic farming yielded starvation, poverty and political chaos.”
The green agenda is just another imperialistic weapon. Countries in the Global South are the first guinea pigs and then they continue their experiments on small “allies” like the Netherlands.
the blame-e says
“Drought in Central America is a good part of why our border is being overrun.”
Free money, free George Soros cellphones, promises once again that American streets are paved in gold, the destruction of the American Middle Class, the fact that no country can long claim sovereignty without secure borders. This is what is driving our borders to being overrun.
And it’s not just our southern borders. Legal immigration no longer exists in the United States. Asylum seekers and refugees are flooding the United States because of all the proxy wars. The population of the Ukraine has been reduced by half since the war began. And they are not going home. This has nothing to do with weather, climate, or CO2.
The Lizard of Oz says
“You can fool some of the people all of the time”
Climate change in itself is a huge delusion.
“At the current co2 levels the average temperature of earth will likely be 4-5 degrees higher than pre industrial.” Just think about the logic in this statement.
Climate models cannot predict anything useful. Climate is a complex chaotic system. There are things which cannot be computed, climate is one of them. Even weather forecasts, beyond a few days become ever more error prone.
The problem with the Church of Climate Change Catastrophe is the Malthusian mindset of scarcity and the dogma of technocracy where only our ‘experts’ have the answers, and if we can’t think of a solution then it can’t be thunk by anyone else.
The alternative is a mindset of abundance knowing someone, somewhere, will figure out solutions to todays problems. As for CO2, its greening the planet, deserts are receding. If Soros and his mates stopped funding the transport, you’d have far less “refugees” hoping over the US southern border.
This is all unnecessary statistics and mumbo-jumbo, whether it has any truth to it is beside the point. The key to this whole climate change process is the intentional, on-going, high-tech weather modification programs, e.g. stratospheric aerosols injections. That’s the Elephant in the room not all these little CO2 thises and thats. This was and has been a gigantic program. Read my post “What if?”.
For climate change and global warming information, start here:
While I’m not yet convinced of CO2 not being a problem in the atmosphere [previous highs had different ocean acidities et alia that would have taken longer to develop, more time for nature to adapt; slightly higher temperatures may be nasty for various regions, even if the short term tendencies are more driven by the solar output signal], I do think that the (potential) problem is about to be solved in any case, both as food waste/biological sludge to HTL (hydrothermal liquifaction, for feedstock to oil refineries), and direct carbon capture (I’d imagine given the chemistry of CO2 and CO that the liquid and superfluid states should be semiconductors that undergo electrochemical splitting like water—pure carbon has useful applications from steel production to various new carbon molecules/nanotubes et alia; liquid phase of CO2 start around 40 bar at room temperature). It just sounds stupid to get rid of successful technologies such as oil and the internal combustion engine, let alone the nitrogen psychosis hitting the Netherlands (HTL can also produce high concentration ammonia—again, a feed stock) as an excuse to shut down farms.
In the video, he’s quite gentle on the eugenicists—they were (literally) the progressives of their day. I do think the original eugenicists were correct about one matter: the harms of lead (Pb) poisoning. I did a bit of research on the matter, and it also addresses race disparities, and bad epidemiology (mainly chapter 4; link expires in 6 days).
One thing that I think can be learned from Mexico, and the speaker in the video went the opposite route about it for the same effect, is that trade school should be prerequisite for engineering degrees. Less pie in the sky, more practical meets theoretical.
That ABC report — “In August of 2021, about 18.9% of COVID-19 deaths occurred among the vaccinated. Six months later, in February 2022, that proportional percent of deaths had increased to more than 40%.” — is exactly what would be expected if the vaccines are only 75% effective in preventing death. I certainly took the risk of a 1 in 100,000 chance of complications from the vaccine to gain that advantage.
The numbers are what would be expected since between August, 2021 to February 2022 percent of vaccinated was still increasing sharply. I did a simple calculation. If the percent of the population that had been vaccinated increased from 60 to 80 percent one would expect to see the number deaths among the vaccinated to increase from 20 to 50 percent.
This result is entirely predicted from 4-fold decrease in the death rate due to the vaccine.
Toivos, get your booster pal. Please hurry.
And as it’s not a vaccine one is not vaccinated. Poisoned actually.
Ocean Jasper says
Just give me a Mr. Fusion and a flying car!
Keith Harbaugh says
Yes, the omnipresence of politically correct lies, in the top echelons of our society, on many subjects.
For another instance of the lies, see
From the article:
To be a respectable American, you must at least pretend to believe preposterous things:
Diversity is our strength,
men can become women and vice versa,
all races are precisely equal,
the United States is a wonderful force for good all around the world.
But the most preposterous thing you have to believe may be about the biology of race.
[I beg to differ.
It is that men can have babies.
But the subject of the article is certainly worth noting too.]
The American Medical Association wants you to “recognize race as a social, not biological, construct.”
The Smithsonian Museum says, “Race, while not a valid biological concept, is a real social construction that gives or denies benefits and privileges.
White people invented race so we could oppress people. This rubbish is everywhere.
The American Psychological Association has a glossy brochure that tells you what to think, with pictures of social constructs on the cover.
Six PhDs explain that “race is a social construction rather than a biological reality” and that “The ‘racial’ worldview was invented to assign some groups to perpetual low status, while others were permitted access to privilege, power, and wealth.”
There is so much evidence for the biological basis of race that I’ll just skim the surface. Even the most intellectually sleepy people notice that East Africans win long-distance races.
People of West African origins dominate sprints …
[One can also note the racial makeup of the NBA, WNBA, and the positions where speed is critical of each NFL team.]
Whether pandemic fascism or climate delusion or insect-eating. One should always analyze who are the big investors, i.e. the beneficiaries of these campaigns. It is guaranteed that you will always come across the same names. If I want to know what will happen tomorrow in Europe, then I look at what is happening today in the USA. Sorry to bring this up again. But loosely based on the blessed George Carlin: “We live in a freak show. And we in the USA have a front row seat.”. I’ll add, “And we in Europe are sitting right behind it.”.
Perhaps I should say that we need the oxygen that plants synthesize, and that plants need CO2 to produce it. Do they want to leave us without oxygen?…
Here are two links with public domaine facts that I think should be taken into consideration.
1)James Corbett addressing the misdirection with the touting of the IPCC.
2)MP Andrew Bridgen addresses UK Parliment with the numbers- Cvd vs Vx
Miguel de Juan Fernandez says
Dear Larry, just an observation about Galileo: he wasn’t against Catholic Church, he wasn’t punished except being forbidden to teach his theory Earth moving around the Sun (that Copernico had told several decades before) as a fact, because he didn’t demonstrate the reality of the movement with facts or solid arguments…that was why the Catholic Church sentenced him to silence in this respect. He was confined to live in a friend bishop’s palace and was allowed to investigate other scientific facts. Best regards from Spain, Larry
the blame-e says
“. . . enduring punishment for believing in something we now know to be an immutable truth.”
The Democrats and J6, the Democrats and soon to be arrested and “Galileoed” Donald Trump, MSM, woke culture, and cancel culture have proven that everything and anything is “mutable.”
Another very pertinent article, Johnson.
You touched earlier upon the moral depravities being forced on the western nations by the criminal oligarchical mafia, that has usurped and monopolised power for several generations now.
Today you comment on the “scientific” perversions infesting officialdom – but in this case the entire globe is being held hostage.
Surely, such overthrow of common sense and sanity and logic follows a pattern and pursues and agenda:
Revelation 11:18 “And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth”
Those that destroy the earth are busy at work, socially, economically, financially, politically, and in all the relevant scientific fields.
Frank D. says
The Climate changes in the last 200 years are significant. Like in the last 400.000 years. Look for Pleistocene.
And exactly, CO2 is the base for Oxygene. And for food. More CO2, more food.
To understand the Greens – see Michael Moore Planet of the Humans.
Curt Nichols says
Ukraine, abortion, and climate change. At their heart? They are all a death cult. Ukraine and abortion is rather clear. The climate change loons are not. They paint their pretty pictures about saving the polar bear.
It is actually about genocide, thru starvation and other means. It is about slavery.
You cannot leave your 15 mile zone. You can’t. Me? I’m flying to Bali for the climate conference. But I’m important!!
Oh, you little yellow and brown people. Uh, no air conditioning for you. Or running water. Those are carbon hateful. We will supply you vaccines and “medicines” to knock your fertility down. We need a few of you in your colorful native garb for pictures and slave labor. But otherwise, sorry. You just will never live like me. You can look at me in Bali in my air-conditioned beach resort. Surely that is enough for your little dreams?
And farming. How hateful. How destructive of Gaia! How will we feed everyone? Well, we won’t Mr. Bond. You see, we have to kill them. Surely that is kinder than them starving to death when we shut the farms down.
And then when I return from Bali, I can ride my bicycles thru the open woodlands and meadows. And smell the clean air. As I bump over the graves.
Shared with my FB friends.
As an engineer, I know that science can calculate and thus foresay certain simple things, like a rocket flying to the moon, or the energy you need to heat something up.
But there are a lot of events that can not be calculated, but seem to be chaotic. Simple example is the weather
Will Wortman says
The carbon molecule is the basic building block of all “carbon based life forms” and the globalist left wants to control/sequester/tax/eliminate/demean carbon as a pollutant.
That is all you need to know about their motivation.
I most certainly can argue that human introduced carbon into the atmosphere is not contributing to warming.
Franco Maloberti says
This is the translation of an article that I published a couple of months ago in the Come Don Chisciotte online journal
The Scientific Method and the Climate Change
The scientific method uses evidence and experimentation to establish facts objectively. The basic steps are observation, hypothesis, prediction, experimentation, and analysis of the results. The key requirement is to experiment with different input values and different boundary conditions. The results must then test the hypothesis. Of course, the scientific method can only apply to verifiable phenomena.
In the past, many philosophers debated science. In the beginning, we had the Greek philosophers. Plato became interested in the rational world. Socrates analyzed knowledge using maieutics, and Aristotle used logic and metaphysics. Later, during the Renaissance, Francis Bacon focused on inductive reasoning; Isaac Newton used both inductive and deductive reasoning; Galileo Galilei underlined the need to have a repeatability of the results. Pamela Irvin Lazorko, in her article “Science and non-Science”  explains:
The scientific method proceeds from data collected by observing phenomena. Based on the observations, the inquirer crafts a hypothesis – an idea that hopes to explain the observations. Ideally, a scientific experiment to test a hypothesis seeks to control the variables thought to affect the experiment’s outcome, varying only a single element of the experimental situation at a time so that the effect of this single variable on the results can be measured or otherwise observed. Analysis of experimental results might then show the original hypothesis to be mistaken, in which case it is discarded, and an alternative hypothesis developed and tested. In the event that a hypothesis is not disproved by experimental results, it might form the basis for a theory explaining the phenomenon. Science also places importance on the publication of experiments, that they might be recreated by other researchers, demonstrating the consistency of claimed observations, and so that they may possibly further refine the process.
Note that the description recommends changing only one variable and verifying that the experimental results match the equations or model. The experiments must then be repeated for verification by others.
The same article describes non-science or pseudo-science as:
‘Non-science’ means more than that which is antithetical to science. As sources of human knowledge, non-scientific approaches such as philosophy, theology, and art have usefully guided visions of the ‘why’ of our existence, our interactions with one another, or defined morality/ethics. By contrast, the label ‘pseudo-science’ encompasses attempts at claiming a mantle of truth by endeavors that, although to the layman might seem scientific, lack testability and the vigorous peer-review inherent in the scientific process. Astrology, for example, has a set of rules and underlying concepts which cannot be tested. The vagueness of its predictions avoids falsification precisely because they are ambiguous.
With my mind numb from the above definitions, perhaps because I’m a bit old-fashioned, I classified climate studies as a non-science. The reasons: the input quantities cannot be modified to test the hypotheses. The sun is, for example, not kind enough to change the energy flow on demand. The boundary conditions are measured with great approximation. Experiments cannot be repeated and verified. To prove my singular opinion, let us consider computers whose enormous computing power is of great help. The fundamental equations of physics and other scientific disciplines apply only to certain “ideal” conditions. Furthermore, the laws of physics include various parameters (the physical constants – or variables) that must be measured by experiments. When the system becomes complicated, exceptions to the fundamental laws must be made using corrective equations based on parameters that, however, have no physical meaning, and their value must be found by other experiments. This is what happens, for example, to model a transistor. The initial model based on physical laws has been “adjusted” with parameters whose value is established by hundreds or thousands of experimental fitting measurements. Using wrong or simply inaccurate parameters leads to bizarre descriptions with fanciful results. Having powerful computers doesn’t help if you use inaccurate models; often, “improvement” adds complexity. The result is that we understand even less about what is happening.
This scenario is perhaps what, I believe, has happened in climatology. The presentation of Susan Solomon, Co-Chair of WG I – IPCC, made at the Royal Society of London in March 2007, shows the results of 23 models with similar trends. They have many beautiful temporal knurls and predictions of temperature variations to the hundredth of a degree (accuracy not achievable with actual measurements). Given that nature carries out experiments and the input quantities are a little imprecise (such as the energy that arrives from the sun or the subsoil), I asked myself: given that the 23 models use different resolutions and introduce parameters, at least two each, how do you get 46 values from the few experiments that give us the sun, the clouds and, perhaps, the moon? And who made the temporal knurls? How do you get results that are all concordant (or concordant)? In Susan Solomon’s presentation, the famous and controversial “hockey stick” graph “invented” by Michael Mann of Penn State University predicted an exaggerated temperature increase. The affair had legal aftermath because another climatologist Tim Ball had offended him. A filing resolved the matter, but Mann had to pay the court costs since he had refused to provide the data that had generated his graph (denied verifiability). An interesting thing in Susan Solomon’s presentation is a photo of a tired bear resting on a block of ice. Perhaps the message was that the poor fellow felt the changes and, if anything, did not know how to swim. On the other hand, there was a nice linear interpolation for twenty years and other graphs over intervals of thirty-forty years when we are talking about timescales of several hundred years.
Intrigued, I also researched on the Web and came across a substantial article describing models 11 and 12 of the IPCC 2007. It was written by 42 authors (first author T. L. Delworth) from 8 different institutions worldwide, sent to the “Journal of Climate” magazine on December 8, 2004, lightning-fast revised and revised in its final form on March 18, 2005. The article, the first of a series of four, illustrates the “improvements” introduced compared to the previous LM2 model. It says, among other things:
Second, the Caspian Sea is now treated as a special land surface type. This is necessary since the Caspian Sea is not included as part of the ocean model, and there is no lake model within LM2.0. The Caspian Sea is maintained as a saturated surface; if the predicted soil water for any grid box in the Caspian Sea exceeds saturation, the excess water is treated as runoff and is routed to the ocean point corresponding to the mouth of the Indus River. Conversely, if the predicted soil water at any grid point in the Caspian Sea is less than saturation, sufficient freshwater is moved instantaneously from the ocean at the mouth of the Indus river to the Caspian Sea to maintain saturation. Thus, the atmospheric model sees the Caspian Sea as a saturated surface while global water conservation is maintained.
Third, the land model was modified to suppress evaporation from land when soil is frozen at a depth of about 30 cm. This has a significant warming impact by reducing evaporation and cloudiness at higher latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere during late spring and summer, resulting in enhanced shortwave radiation at the surface and warmer near-surface air temperature. However, this change also contributes to a thinning of the Arctic sea ice, which amplifies an existing bias toward thin Arctic sea ice (described below).
And the parameters?
“This was accomplished through a 45% increase (from 4.7 Å~ 10−6 s−1 to 6.8 Å~ 10−6 s−1) in the cloud scheme parameter that controls the rate of erosion of clouds under convective conditions.”
“the value of the cloud drop radius threshold value for the onset of raindrop formation was reduced from 10.6 μm in AM2.0 to 8 μm in AM2.1”
“the parameter controlling the rate of erosion of clouds under convective conditions was increased by 18% (from 6.8 10−6 s−1 in AM2.0 to 8 10−6 s−1 in AM2.1)”
You can take water from the Caspian Sea and fly it 2500 kilometers to the Indian Ocean (or vice versa), but changing a parameter by 45% seems like an exaggeration.
Let us now consider the soil issue also studied in model 13, which, according to Chapter 8 of the IPCC report 2007 Climate Models and their Evaluation” , uses the article “Improved Ground Hydrology Calculations for Global Climate Models Soil Water Movement and Evapotranspiration” by F. Abramopoulis, C- Rozenweiz, B. Choudhuri, Journal of Climate, 2008 . It is a detailed study with many equations. It assumes that Darcy’s law is valid for all subsoil (why?) and models it in layers with different permeability that change stepwise. He then believes that at a certain depth, it is impermeable (?). For the solution of the equations over time, he uses an implicit method that guarantees stability, but, as known, it is not very precise. The article then uses a logarithmic fitting to (only) the second order using personal communications data. It then says that even though the matric potential and hydraulic conductivity show hysteresis, the effect is neglected for simplicity.
In addition to the two articles, I examined other references from chapter 8 of the IPCC-WG1 2007 report. The majority use many equations, but the solutions use approximations and parameters also provided by others. The physical constants used are not accurate. For example,  uses 917 kg/m-3 for the density of ice, but apparently, the value is not so precise: according to , sea ice ranges from 720 to 940 kg/m-3. In the same article , of great mathematical complexity, we read, among other things:
They are therefore approximated with forward or backward differences rather than centered three-time level forms (page 9).
Rain has no effect on sea ice or snow in the model (page 173).
However, it is critical that the sum of the fractions never exceeds one. Otherwise, ice formation might become unstable (page 179).
For simplicity, no shortwave radiation is allowed to penetrate through snow, and all of the near-infrared radiation and 30% of the visible radiation are assumed to be absorbed in the surface of sea ice (page 181).
Another feature of models is that they address different aspects separately and link the various outcomes for a supposedly combined effect. As known, the rule of superposition of effects does not hold for non-linear systems.
I focused on what existed in 2007 because it was said that: “Warming is unequivocal, and most of the warming of the past 50 years is very likely (90%) due to increases in greenhouse gases.”
The above is a small insight into the current situation. There are all aspects of human nature and, in particular, what psychologists call the Icarus syndrome: that desire to go higher and higher, chasing the myth that answers a question of crucial importance for humanity: “explain why something exists or happens.” However, the search for an explanation goes beyond the teachings of the scientific method. A surrogate answer is created by the computer and by hypothetical tests. The result is a meta-model, a sort of religious icon, which could also correspond to the truth (and we will know this in several decades or centuries), but which does not follow the rules imposed by the scientific method.
All this had massive funding that produced tens of thousands of papers that were impossible to untangle. All that money is probably motivated by political-strategic objectives, first of all, energy control. I don’t think climate studies guided policymakers’ decisions, but some policymakers asked for studies to “convince” them to make certain decisions. For this reason, they have provided copious funding for increasingly sophisticated instruments that look like the feathers and wax of the wings built by Daedalus for his son Icarus.
 T. L. Delworth et al. “GFDL’s CM2 Global Coupled Climate Models. Part I: Formulation and Simulation Characteristics” Journal of Climate, Vol. 19, N. 5 (March 2006), pp. 643-674.
 IPCC Climate Change 2007 – Chapter 8 Climate Models and their Evaluation.
 Abramopoulos et al. “Improved Ground Hydrology Calculations for Global Climate Models (GCMs): Soil Water Movement and Evapotranspiration,” Journal of Climate
Vol. 1, No. 9 (September 1988), pp. 921-941.
 Description of the NCAR Community Atmosphere Model (CAM 3.0) https://www.cesm.ucar.edu/models/atm-cam/docs/description/description.pdf
 G. W. Timco, R. M.W. Frederking “A review of sea ice density,” Cold Region Science and Technology,” Elsevier, 1996.
The conspiracists in the Cabal love this kind of stuff! Anything and everything to distract from the real cause.
(Thank you for your article)
For those who want to know what IPCC understands by ‘Sea level’ read ‘Box TS.4: Sea Level’.
It differs a lot from the ‘Sea level’ you can see when looking at the sea.
2 factors mentioned are human-made (groundwater extraction and dam-storage).
They need to be subtracted to get the ‘Sea Level’ you want to look at.
They need to be subtracted because they have no relation to CO2 but nevertheless have an influence on Sea Level.
Usually in science one needs a common understanding how a term (like ‘sea level’) is defined. Otherwise you use a term ‘sea level’ but have no understanding what it means.
I’m living in Germany and have not met any person in the last 20 years who even bothered to have a short look at this IPCC report.
They didn’t even want.
Those with backgrounds from STEM immediately understood that ‘sea level’ has to be defined by the claim maker (IPCC).
Those with other backgrounds looked irritated that it is even possible to have different definitions of ‘sea level’ depending on what you look at.
Dr Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum clearly acts like Galileo with his 50 years work at the WEF grindstone redesigning the psyches of the Western Political elites who have taken his global leadership courses and bought into his transhuman green shaping narratives methods in our engineered bankrupt western moral & ethical vacuum.
As Putin has demonstrated, sane peace loving humanity capable of being aware of objective reality and resistant to delusion, perversion and greed requires restoration of traditional Orthodox Christianity values working in partnership with traditional Islam , Torah Judaism , authentic Confucianism , sincere Buddhist and Hindu morals and ethics.
Ethical sharers of win-win perceptions of objective reality like yourself Larry are clearly not motivated by greed or any desire to deceptively eliminate perceived competition in a zero sum winner takes all game the oligarchy & WEF are playing for keeps against all of us.
Jon Liddle says
Stick to politics & the military, Larry. Much safer.
Will Wortman says
Sorry Larry, but the Catholic Church did not consider the belief that the earth revolved around the sun as heretical.
Copernicus(a catholic priest) posited that theory long before Galileo and so did Kepler. In fact, Kepler’s teacher in university believed in a heliocentric solar system
The catholic church had no problem with either of those men.
They posited it as a theory.
Galileo, on the other hand was teaching that the Sun was the center of the “Universe”(wrong) as a fact when it was not proven.
His biggest problem seems to be that he was a bit of a jackass. so the church put him under Palace arrest for a while. Should they have done that? No, but it was not the “Persecution” we are all supposed to believe.
I could make a better argument that the Catholic church “invented” the modern sciences than that it was ever anti-science.
One big problem a fair number of people commenting here have is that they seem incapable of distinguishing between the capitalist class provoking a crisis in order to gain a benefit, and then making opportunistic use of a crisis.
To the commenters the second possibility seems not to exist, they’ve made the idea of “cui bono” the sole foundation of their logic. Therefore, the errors in their conclusions are very significant.
This logic leads to very black and white views and feeds the conspiracy-thinking bias.
It’s all more complex and subtle.
And yes, there is evidence that the climate is changing as a result of industry.
Something that’s never mentioned here is that there are strong signs that we’ve passed the oil-peak point (statistical proof, but also from the information the oil industry is putting out, which has a lot of lip stick on it but still points at a crisis).
And yes, it’d probably lead to a dramatic drop of living standards globally and de-industrialisation.
These are the things we should be talking about if our elites weren’t in denial. Though China, Russia and the Global South might be successful in securing a bigger slice of the pie at the West’s expense, in the short term, these problems won’t be gone.
Western capitalism has reached the limits imposed by their competitors, but capitalism is quickly reaching the limits imposed by the planet. All you bible readers out there might be able to find references to this phenomenon, perhaps?
CC: “something that’s never mentioned here is…” purposeful manipulation of the weather by the elites’ technological programs. See my post “What if?” Cut right to the “chase”.
“capitalist class”? What in the hell is that? Capitalism is very simple to understand once you clear your mind of the fog of brain-washing by communist ideology.
Capitalism is nothing more and nothing less than Human Nature. Capitalism means that a man/woman can enjoy the fruits of their labor. And not have it stolen by socialists.
What kind of class is that? It’s not a “class”, it’s you and me. We are all capitalists unless you don’t believe in personal property. And the sovereignty of the individual.
So let’s stop with this propaganda.
Something I’m certain about is that for whatever reason the Arctic ocean sea ice is melting and the Atlantic penetration into it increases, by a fraction of .1%, with every tide. In the long term that means a western European climate extending to the New Siberian Islands. The lands to the south are made up of permafrost, Yamal peninsular for instance doesn’t rise much above 45m anywhere but the permafrost is 65m+ deep and caps huge gas deposits. In a sane world these gas deposits would be a priority to use, saving gas in warmer climes for posterity. Should they not be tapped and exhausted before the new climate regime north of them becomes established it will lead to the release of those gas deposits as methane, very likely in catastrophic outbursts.
I’m in no position to judge their veracity but some reports claim sufficient gas deposits there to supply world energy needs for 3 centuries at current usage rates. In an ideal world someone would negotiate long term contracts with the Russians to exploit these reserves before they become both problematic and dangerous, a pipeline to Europe would serve.
If you really want a modern day Gallileo you should re-examine Velikovsky’s work, based on a wide reading of world ‘mythologies’ he concluded that all the eye witness accounts agreed that Venus had broken out of Jupiter, I think the Greeks had it as ‘bursting from the head of Zeus fully formed’ based on this he made a number of predictions about Venus all of which were confirmed by the first probes, nothing…. even when Jupiter’s core appeared to be missing, nothing…. I’m just suggesting trying that paradigm shift on for size to better understand the dilemma of Gallileo’s critics.
“… he concluded that all the eye witness accounts agreed that Venus had broken out of Jupiter …”
Actually, Venus/Aphrodite “is born off the coast of Cythera from the foam …”
It was Athena, a warrior goddess, who “was believed to have been born from the forehead of her father Zeus” …
According to Greek mythology, (male) gods could bear children … (!)
Nuno Cardoso da Silva says
“In August of 2021, about 18.9% of COVID-19 deaths occurred among the vaccinated. Six months later, in February 2022, that proportional percent of deaths had increased to more than 40%.”
Very scientific!… It has to do with the percentage of the population which has been vaccinated. If 100% of the people were vaccinated, 100% of the COVID-19 deaths would be among the vaccinated… But How many would that be? What percentage of the whole population?
I don’t know how effective or how dangerous the vaccines are, but statements like the one quoted above are simply idiotic…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_E._Mann this man is the father of hockey stick graph, in my opinion his hypothesis does not pass the criteria of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability, but the important thing he is a democrat party activist and a very militant one, for me the link between the two conditions is clear, there is no any valid science only the purpose of manipulate population
As far as systems go, there is one that is hidden in plain site and often misunderstood.
The system in place that is causing what would normally seem to be normal well adjusted people to become unhinged and ideological about subjects that have their start in lies and deception can clearly be seen as the same system that has been written about for thousands of years that allows humans to embrace whatever they want with gusto.
However, this oft written about systems purpose and designed output are often misrepresented, for it indeed allows the partaker of said system to amplify whatever it is they are focused on to the point that it is unmistakable to anyone observing from the outside that the subject is indeed completely filled to the brim with whatever it is they truly desired.
Whether that be good or ill is of no concern.
For the system is designed to allow outside observers to more easily and readily identify the wheat, and identify the chaff.
Let the righteous be righteous still. Let the wicked be wicked still.
Allow them their lusts. For they have one and all been handed over to them.
I am not a scientist. How do I decide between the rival ‘facts’ on either side of the climate change argument? One fact I do know is that a huge majority of reputable scientists believe in such change and that it is caused by human activity.
Larry’s is an unmissable blog where the war in Ukraine is concerned. But because it’s contrarian it attracts swarms of rightwing nutjobs who don’t know their arses from their elbows – America’s tragedy is that to stand on one or other side of the cultural argument means partnering with morons.
Wake up, guys. Try to sniff the reality.
LOL. Boy are you a good example of those who believe anything that “a majority” believes – esp. a majority of bought, paid for “scientists”. Have a look at what went on at Stanford re: the Covid hustle. Money can buy many things.
Good article and wide array of comments. For me it’s quite simple. The people that promote global warming eventually changed terms to climate change. They are the same ones that complain about overpopulation. What they are is congenital liars. Why do people listen to people that lie? Wind and solar can be supplemental but can never replace fossil fuels. In California 30% of our electricity comes from out of state. Gavin Newsom is pushing electric cars, wind and solar as the threat of rolling blackouts is a real event. Newsom is a fraud and a liar who destroyed San Francisco as a 2 term mayor.
Barack Obama and his wife complained about rising oceans for years. They subsequently spent $14+ million of a house at Martha’s Vineyard. A fine example of a congenital liar. Why believe this narrative?
We just had a global event COVID that destroyed global economies and have murdered millions. To this date there is not one lab that has isolated SARS Covid II. Apparently it does not exist. Lies from Liars.
We do need Galileo, and Ghandi, and Abe Lincoln.
Fulano de Tal says
“To this date there is not one lab that has isolated SARS Covid II. Apparently it does not exist”.
First things first: you should start by not spreading blatant lies.
Just search for “virus sars covid 2019 isolated” in google, you mega liar.
Jack Gordon says
Back a couple of years ago, I used observational methodology to deconstruct the COVID jab narrative. One day I drove by a local bus station and its big adjacent parking lot. Authorities had closed it to business and converted it into an outdoor “vaccine” administration center manned by National Guard troopers. It was a weekend and my uber scientific reasoning went like this: “How can it be possible that a fellow whose job is to change oil in cars on Thursday is qualified to stick a needle in my arm on Saturday? To inject me with a product tested less than the synthetic oil he sometimes uses over at his regular job? Clearly he isn’t but ‘authorities’ insist he is. Ergo, this entire process is a smelly crock of shyte! ” Turns out that, if Soldier Bob had been injecting Quaker State, it might have been less harmful than the crap cooked up by Moderna and Pfizer.
Robert Jones says
Yeah! But where is the science in any “solutions”to climate change? Heck we are not even allowed to talk about population n and birth control.
Also Military Emmissions are excluded from any international targets!
We are living in a nonsense world!
Karl Schmid says
Speaking of CO2. Als Forester , it ist basic knowledge that CO2 is essentiell to Life on this Planet. In simple terms, photosynthesis therefore means: plants (and certain bacteria) use light, water and carbon dioxide to put together something new: namely glucose and oxygen. In other words: energy-rich organic substances are created from energy-poor inorganic substances with the help of solar energy.
Dr. George W. Oprisko says
Prior to closure of the gap between North America and South America, warm water flowing NW from Cape Aghulas past Fernando De Noronha passed westward into the tropical Pacific.
This world wide oceanic circulation created a climate regime averaging 25 degrees Celsius at the poles, far warmer than now.
Closure of the Isthmus, forced this warm water northward along the east coast of North America, until it evaporated in the Barents Sea and descended to abyssal depths, thence flowing down the Mid-Atlantic Ridge to the Great Southern Ocean, where it over millenia rose to the surface, gradually shifting northward, becoming again a tropical current, bound for the Americas.
Thus one could say that global cooling, for the ice ages soon followed, was, and is caused by plate tectonics.
Thus, plate tectonics should be banned… don’t you agree???
Absolutely! Those plates are associated with many “hazardous to humans” disruptions of societal structures which interfere with the day to day indoctrination’s of the masses that provide us “elite” with whatever we desire.
Plus the earthquakes sometimes forget to not explode under our bunkers. Do you have ANY idea how much a bunker costs that you build on the fault line that runs through New Zealand!
It’s outrageous I tell you! These Plate Tectonics (and any who support them) Must Be Banned!
>8/10 SP sir.
Well done fren. brought forth a smile.
For me human induced Climate Change is real. And it is a serious threat. May be more serious than the danger of nuclear war, because it’s not us pulling the trigger anymore, but Nature itself, something not in our control. For me the starving kids in Africa and else, the increasing number of drug addicts and homeless, especially in the US, are also real. In the case of Climate change, somebody very smart figured, how to make it a very lucrative business model. It is so lucrative that almost everybody hopped on it. There’s lots of money and power to gain from. Far less than from solving problems of some hungry kids, or druggies, or lazzy beggars, or stray dogs, cats …. . And even less money and power to gain from an equivalent very serious threat of an asteroid the size of a house, or Coronal mass ejection hitting the Earth. …. So in some sense I agree with Larry , but also with MAC, though not with their conclusion that the thing is deliberate hoax invented by the elite to squeeze the people . The elite is just EXPLOITING the fact that its there. Very similar to the H1N1, the Covid19, and now the Ukraine war. HOWEVER, doesn’t change that we should solve it, or mitigate.
Absolutely. Question is: which “humans”? See my “What if?” below
The Lizard of Oz says
I’m happy to let the wokerati take their jabs, delude themselves about whether they’re a male, a female, a dog or a donkey, live in fear of invisible bogey men like ozone holes and global warming, believing windmills give more energy than it takes to make them and that solar panels are a good idea in northern climes to warm your home in winter.
They can cheer on corrupt Nazies in Ukraine and even believe Rusher will lose. They can think government’s bailing out incompetent banksters is a good idea. They can believe the markets aren’t rigged and Brandon won an election fair and square.
They can signal their virtue driving around in the Teslas, e-scooters, e-bikes and especially their electric busses. See how the green revolution is hotting up.
All aboard, move down the back of the bus! It’s the Meltdown Express, next stop the Darwin Awards.
The special subject of the wokerati is victimology, where do your relate in the hierarchy of victimhood? They shall find that when the hard times come and the tough got going, they’re left behind, victims of their own ignorance and stupidity.
The wokerati make me think that maybe the eugenicists have got a point.
Galileo had a hard time with the establishment of his day, but he was right and they went by the wayside. It’s good to be a heretic.
Art Thomas says
I remember many of these spectacularly wrong predictions made around 1970, particularly Paul Ehrlich’s. Apparently Ehrlich still refuses to admit he was wrong.
Who are the real “Deniers” in this 50+ year scam?
Frank E Howard says
The metaphor of a heroic Galileo challenging an obtuse Catholic Church is simplistic. For example, Galileo believed that oceanic tides occurred only once a day. Basically, the science of scripture scholarship had not advanced as rapidly as had physical science. Details are discussed in Galileo in Rome, by William R. Shea and Mariano Artigas (2003)
Minnesota Fats says
How close are the world powers in developing robots to fight wars instead of having boot on the ground, so to speak?
In other words, instead of losing 100,000 young men in Ukraine type wars, the combatants would lose robots?
just saying says
Walking robots are very expensive.
Helm ab zum Gebet says
I have a different take on this. Who is the boss of Biden?
In my eyes, the richest people in the US (and maybe England). They are not listed in Forbes magazine and are not in the spotlight. Nuland, Soros and Gates are their vassals.
They plan to make a lot of money on climate change. They have already made a lot of money with Corona and currently with the arms industry.
They also invented gendering for the division of society (as well as the sexual revolution in the 60s – it’s just a bad copy). They have also earned from the second world war, helped Hitler to power and prolonged the war.
Biden, Nuland & Co. are not delusional – they are merely carrying out the orders of their bosses.
But – interesting question; which people are among the richest families? In the past, in connection with Yukos, Jacob Rothschild has already been exposed, or Rockefeller, Ford and J.P. Morgan have been named.
I don’t think the names have changed?
Tom S. says
Galileo could not and did not prove heliocentrism, ever. Through obtuseness or hubris he inserted himself into Church politics by ridiculing the Pope in his “Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems” while simultaneously, consciously, violating the terms of his 1616 “parole” (his oath) to not teach heliocentrism as fact without being able to prove it, which he could not do.
Maffeo Vincenzo Barberini (Urban VIII) was considered one of the most intelligent, urbane men in Europe. Most that knew them both thought him every bit Galileo’s intellectual equal; and his ego was also a match for Galileo’s, which is saying something. Galileo’s arrogance would not have allowed him to recognize a lesser being as a friend and friends they clearly were, as nearly as two such egos could recognize friendship. Barberini, as a Cardinal, had been instrumental in securing the very favorable parole conditions for Galileo in 1616 and largely agreed with the probable correctness of heliocentrism; but, the leap from speculation around the dinner table to radically changing Doctrine for the Catholic world was far to great a stretch and Barberini took his responsibility to protect the Church deadly seriously. With Tilly dead after the Battle of the Rain, Gustavus Adolphus’ Protestant army ranging about Germany, Cardinal Richelieu spending French Catholic money to raise Protestant armies against Catholic princes, the Spanish Church/Crown involved in all sorts of political skullduggery to seize control of the Catholic Church over all, and, for the first time, the necessity of an armed guard to accompany the Pope in his travels within the Vatican because of proven assassination plots 1632, the darkest time for the Catholic Church in its history, was not the year to stand in front of the Inquisition to answer for publishing a story to all appearances designed as a thumb in the eye of the Papacy as an institution, a blatant undermining of Church authority, and a characterization of the Pope, personally, as a fool. It was just too much; and Galileo still couldn’t prove heliocentrism. For a man already in the waning years of his life Galileo’s punishment was light indeed. The “house arrest” he was sentenced to was no Gulag by any stretch.
Proof of heliocentrism, which the Church accepted, would arrive in the calculations of Isaac Newton who would be born in 1642, the year Galileo died. If anything the Church was, however unconsciously, standing up for science by demanding proof, which Galileo, out of sheer hubris, could not admit he did not have. A disinterested observer might conclude that the “scientific community” owes Urban VIII a great debt of gratitude for insisting, possibly for the first time in human history, that doctrine/policy be based in what would come to be known as “scientific theory”, i.e. the validation of a hypothesis by logical calculation, based on quantifiable factors, and supported by repeatable demonstration, regardless of personal interest. Barberini, and most of the Church leadership, understood that Doctrine can not be based on supposition, conjecture, or fads; otherwise you become the Church of What’s Happening Now, and soon no Church at all (hello post-modern American Protestantism).
The Church fully deserves criticism for many things, but this isn’t one of them. This slander was one of several invented during the Enlightenment to bolster reputations by creating straw opponents to denigrate, a tradition that “Science”, e.g. A. Fauci et al, continues. It ranks with the, “Before us (the Enlightenment) everyone believed the Earth was flat,” lie.
If Galileo Galilei were, by some miracle of time travel, to be plopped down in 2022 America his besties would be Micheal Mann and Anthony Fauci because they all three believe that, as “Science” made flesh, their opinions should be unassailable.
In the video, the discussion of molecular machines is interesting, now that we are in the time of Covid shots. Will there be more unauthorized mischief within the human body?
The popular Galileo myth serves many purposes, but what actually happened is fascinating:
Humans, so far in the age of man, lack the character to use cutting edge technology. Bless the people who do. However, there are people who use their advanced understanding and knowledge to commit awesome mischief. Secrecy is a great advantage for them, that is, until people of character understand what they are doing. For example, look at the elections process in the US and the digital manipulations. The crooks were far ahead of most of us. Heaven help us in the far more awesome areas of technology and medicine. I hope Mark Mills is right in his optimism.
All I need to know is that our entire system is a fraud. Those in positions of leadership are self serving liars.
One would need to be a complete idiot not to see the hypocrisy in those such as Al Gore. And unfortunately there appears to be generations of brain dead amongst us.
I no longer have trust in anyone even remotely connected to current horde of creeps that make up that group in TPTB.
To follow after these clowns is a fool’s errand.
Galileo had friends in the Roman Catholic Church who protected him … Contrary to popular belief, some cardinals were not that ignorant; on the contrary, they were very interested in arts, scientific matters, etc. …
“The Catholic Church deserves criticism for many things …”
True. But is anybody “criticising” other Christian communities, in particular Protestant ones, for burning “heretics”, scientists …?
Not the Pope, but Calvin …
Darth Readius says
Couple comments before people bash the Catholic church even Nietzsche believed that without Christianity (especially Catholicism) there would be no science. And as we see today, without God there is no science either. Cultural atheism is the death of science.
As far as climate change it belongs in the same sentence as trans, both are so obviously absurd it mind boggling so many people get sucked into it.
Before Climate change was CC it was global cooling and everyone panicked about an ice age. When those predictions failed it became global warming when those predictions failed it became CC so they can act like every variation in weather is due to CC. Which shows that if they knew anything about weather they would know it fluctuates constantly!! Hence why women and nature are associated together 😉
As someone already pointed out CO2 is plant food and is causing a massive earth greening.
Even if CC was real the way to deal with it according to Bjorn Lomborg is to keep using fossil fuels so the poorer countries can develop and have money to adapt while richer countries develop nuclear and other alternative energy sources. Wind and solar are so energy inefficient it’s practically medieval. It turns out poor people trying to not die of starvation don’t give a shit about the environment.
Only rich pampered atheist who can’t handle the burden of being gods themselves seek to worship something. Climate change has nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with atheist creating a religion for themselves.
If I am galileo, i would say:
China Iran USA and Russia co sponsored the covid hoax.
Both sides of the climate change debate are wasting time.
The centre of all issues today (covid or greta) is energy from petroleum and only Iran and Russia has much left. (not al-Sauds, Venezuela or canada)
USA will be allowed a soft landing due to their 5000 warheads. Euros will be left in the cold.
How are the Russian leadership going to keep the western sanctions for a few more years?
When doing one of those mandatory psych experiments in college I had an experience which I didn’t fully appreciate for decades. The experiment began when a researcher in a white lab coat gave us a vocabulary test. One of the words, still remember it was question 13, was “numismatics.” Being a coin collector, I knew I got that one. Of the hundred, had an issue with maybe three.
Turns out the real experiment began when they falsely told us we had missed quite a few of the questions. As the reserarcher waved my answers in front of my face, I noticed a red mark on question 13. So in a crowd of people, I spoke up about the obvious grading error.
The first thing she did was gaslight me, saying I had seen it wrong. Not show me, but told me my perceptions were wrong. Then she asserted authority on me saying they were scientists and whatnot. Without getting upset, I kept telling her she was wrong and not backing down.
Eventually she pulled me out of the room and told me I was the only student they ever had who didn’t eventually accept the premise of the experiment, out of hundreds before me. She gave me credit and I got to leave.
Over time I realized gaslighting and the appeal to authority is all it takes to cow the vast majority of people, even allegedly smart people.
Watch TV and read the news with this in mind.
Richard Hansen says
Galileo was an independent scientist. Today’s scientists are “employees” of big companies or universities getting paychecks. They can be bought and sold and all their scientific conclusions must support the company or university dogma or its no more paycheck for you. Thats the big difference, “science” has sold out to the lying arena of “law”. Science now uses phrases like “settled science”, like something an attorney would say, to mean there is no more need for exploration, shut you down. True science never stops exploring and never shies from questioning that which the lawyers call “settled”. The Pope called a flat earth settled too. Very good comparison Larry.
just saying says
Well said. Science is not about agreeing on any set of claims, but about doubt, questioning and researching. It’s a process, not a state. A wise man once said that the whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people are so full of doubts.
And so the well-intentioned wokesters cite The Science in support of their delusion…uh, well let’s be kind…their brain-washed ideas.
And these are not stupid people. In fact in some ways they are “too smart” for their own good. As with the parable of the ‘Emperor with no Clothes’, sometimes all it takes is a child (who doesn’t “know any better”) to see easily thru the deception and lie.
Clif Heindel says
I respect and value your blog. I will make an effort to read more of the comments..but I must take immediate issue with your post erratic selection of facts and dubious assertion on environmental ‘gaslighting’. An obvious hodge podge with little to no connection except as chosen to confuse readers upon which to then hoist a conclusion that environmental issues and debates around transgender are of a pair of political efforts to deceive the public.
It is argumentation like that which deceives. Conservationists concerns may try to adapt strategies to appeal to neoliberal economics and policy, and become demented in the process, but that doesn’t change the condition of the global ecosystem.
Please reconsider. Thanks.
Larry Johnson says
What specifically is false or misleading? The climate change/warming/cooling religion reflects the same type of ascientific thinking evident in the transgender movement. Both movements are using manufactured “science” that has no basis in reality.
HMS Terror says
When some climate nut comes at me with “science” and the usual “97% of scientists agree” crap, I always come back with “Show me the formula that explicates the relationship between CO2 levels and global temperature data and I’ll pay attention. Until then, you’re talking stories, not science”. That usually shuts ’em down.
Science is the process of testing a predictive formula against past and future observations. Observation alone, no matter how painstaking and precise is not science.
A successful formula gets as close as we can get to the cause of an observed effect. Science can never get closer than that, and so it can never be “settled”. Science is an open-ended quest for a truth it can never (by definition) find.
Over the last half century science has devolved into a service industry while the public has been imbued with Scientism, creating a market for the service. It’s no different than financial, legal, or engineering services. The “scientist” now either delivers the observations that the client is willing to pay for, or the client shops for a scientist who will.
For all the “blissful” naysayers, HERE is what NOAA actually says:
Assessing the Global Climate in February 2023
Earth had its fourth-warmest February; Global sea ice extent hit record low for second consecutive month
… According to NCEI’s Global Annual Temperature Outlook, it is virtually certain (> 99.0%) that the year 2023 will rank among the 10-warmest years on record and a 65% chance it will rank among the top five. …
See my post “What if?”
HMS Terror says
What this “blissful naysayer” would wager is that the NOAA’s “assessment” doesn’t mention that all the raw data they collected prior to 1970 (IIRC?) has been “adjusted” to fit their climate model.
If that’s the (a)historical data they used, their judgment that February 2023 was the “4th warmest” might as well have been sucked out of their thumb.
Inter alia, the “adjustment” obliterated the 1930’s heatwave that created the Dust Bowl and added much misery to the Great Depression.
IOW, the NOAA is lying outright, but even if they weren’t the notion that there is something like an “average global temperature” is absurd on its face, and even further if there was such an animal it would tell us little about the planet’s thermal state.
The reality is that “Climate Science” isn’t. At it’s best, it’s a proto-science in its observation gathering stage, with some quantitative understanding at the margins. The spread of Scientism over the last few decades has, however turned the “scientist” into some sort of high priest. Whatever they themselves believe, they in fact serve an authority that has placed them where they are to preach a creed written by others.
Jim S says
I’m impressed and encouraged by the number of comments which see through the Green agenda. Bruno is indeed a better example, but that’s small beer. 3x the amount of lithium is a severe underestimate from my reading: more like 10-20x
X Billups says
So, you didn’t like my first comment ever and without being offensive, I was just censored. That’s not exactly the twitter files but not so different either. That’s all the same.
I appreciate what you write in general and about Ukraine in particular, but I’ll be more aware of the coincidence of all the connections between opinions on Ukraine, Covid-19, “green”, environment, climate and so on.
I don’t believe in bad coincidences.
How if you ask AI about how to solve the Ukrania conflict
Manuel Verdugo says
Aqui me sentare tranquilamente con palomitas dulces y saladas a disfrutar de la pelicula Idiocracia.
Mientras el mundo se acaba con disparos de misil.
Solo vivo a unos 30 Km de una base militar de USA y tengo la confianza de que si eso suceda me toque irme con el primer impacto.
Aunque tengo la idea deque aun estoy viviendo muy lejos.
What if you were a member of an ultra-secret group that wanted to invent a new way of controlling the masses (other than the usual method – i.e. war)? What if you hired a bunch of intellectuals to explore that idea? And in time that bunch of intellectuals came back with a report for their employers, the ultra-secret group.
And what the report suggested was that one way to control the masses was by using an “environmental catastrophe” that threatened the very existence of life on Earth. In response to that global threat governments could enact all kinds of laws and regulations to control their people. But it would all be done, ostensibly, for the Good.
The question then arose, “How can this ultra-secret group create this environmental catastrophe, or at least the appearance of it”? One answer was that it could use an existing, secret technology controlled by said group to manipulate the weather. ‘Change the weather and you change the climate’.
Well, what would that ‘secret technology’ be? Perhaps it would be an amazing technology invented by an obscure genius like…oh, say…Nicola Tesla. That technology would certainly be secret, because upon Tesla’s death, a governmental agency had illegally seized all of his personal papers.
And suppose, as a thought-experiment, that Tesla had discovered a way to control the weather using charged particles in the upper atmosphere (the stratosphere) TO CREATE HEAT. These particles could be various elements and compounds that responded to very powerful electric fields.
And just suppose that this process involved two main components: (1) an installation that could produce incredible amounts of electricity that could be transmitted wirelessly (in the air), and (2) a means for injecting the aforementioned particles into the air via spraying them from very high flying airplanes into the stratosphere.
If such a secret technology as this existed and could be implemented what a boon! The ultra-secret group, who had sought a new way of controlling the masses via an environmental catastrophe, could actually create that catastrophe! It would be a self-fulfilling prophecy, so to speak.
Then a narrative could be promulgated to the masses via financial control of the mass media and the scientific academia that the Earth was warming. And it WOULD BE warming because you were warming it! Brilliant!!
Meanwhile the poor befuddled people of the World would have no idea what was going on. All they saw was the effect and not the cause. Our hypothetical ultra-secret group could use their narrative and weather modification program for all kinds of purposes to direct the flow of societies, politically, economically, and even philosophically.
But surely this is just some outlandish idea. Surely there couldn’t be any “ultrasecret group” that wanted to control the World’s peoples in such a way. It would be science fiction. Wouldn’t it?
For the uneducated, Cardinal San Roberto Bellarmino (a friend of Galileo) indicated that the Church had no problem abandoning a literal interpretation of any passage in the Bible (the famous one about Joshua stopping the sun in battle), but that for doing so required proof that the scientific theory had been proven. All very logical and reasonable. Galileo provided a test, that of the tides, wrong, since the tides do not depend on the Earth revolving around the sun, but on the Moon.
Obviously, Galileo was not imprisoned or tortured. He always enjoyed the friendship of clergy, bishops, cardinals and even the Pope.
The prison to which he was sentenced consisted of a period of five months in the villa of the Grand Duke of Tuscany, in Trinità dei Monti, followed by a stay in Siena in the palace of his friend Archbishop Piccolominì. In December 1633 he was able to leave for his villa in the country near Florence. There he continued to work and receive numerous colleagues and religious, including Hobbes, Torricelli and Milton.
In fact, his Discorsi of him, the book that consecrates him as a giant of science and that was published without problems in 1638, was written during these years after the sentence.
Klaus Simon says
The observation and remark about the new „religious“ believe is spot on. However, it much longer in the making than most believe, at least in my observation.
The first time I stumbled over it was over 25 years back reading the book „why the Big Bang never happened“. His observation – if we can call it as such – was that human societies shift between Extrems believing / thinking in ideological/religious terms and scientific/reality based terms. ~500BC was a time where scientific approaches were in high regards while ~1000 years later the Potolomaues view of reality was dominant. Gallileo was the first to challenge it. ~1000 years thereafter we had the Renaissance.
If we look at the scientific developments in the last century we observe the shift back to an ideological, believe centered approach toward reality. The black hole theory, dark energy, dark matter, one sided interpretations of the red shift etc. are only some of the examples where believe into something is the only approach. Attempts by scientists to challenge this view based on experimental approaches were dismissed in a similar behavior as were the observations by Galileo dismissed by church scientists at his time.
Independent of what we think about the different aspects of science, they are all made by men with all their failings. I often remember the remarks made by Max Plank – science develops one funeral after another – meaning the old believe system represented by the leading (most powerful) scientists has first to die (in the form of those leading scientists) before something new can grow.
I live in Kansas, have farmed both rainfed and irrigated since 1970. I seems the dry line is moving farther east. Currently, with the Pacific jet just going nuts into the west coast, the rain shadow has extended farther east another 100 miles. In our little piece of SW Kansas, wheat was planted in the dust due to no moisture last fall. With the snow, rains etc. some STILL hasn’t spouted and will not make a crop anyway, due to no vernalization. This is new to me. At the same time, without diesel fuel I don’t know how we’d make it out here. Certainly a lot fewer people. am not seeing any conversations based in the reality of growing food. Last summer the heat reduced the yield of our tomatoes, even with shade. I suspect this summer, the heat may cut our corn yields. Switching to sorghum. At the same time, a perennial rice has now made 8 crops in 4 years in China- a big future for perennial vs. annual crops in terms of climate and top soil.
Charles E. Fromage says
Everyone needs to realize – WE are the (neo) Marxists now. We are promoting an absurd, utopian, post-modern ideology, across the globe – often at the point of a gun (which, also like the former Soviet Union) also benefits our empire.
Moscow was the home of the COMINTERN, but after that disappeared, London and DC became home of the new marxist movement.
The SUN and cosmic rays are the #1 CONTRIBUTOR to climate change not carbon emissions. Temperature change on the earth is directly related to the sun and its output or lack thereof. Ice core samples prove (not a theory) that co2 emissions LAG behind temperature changes by between 700 to 1,000 years. This means that we endure a temperature change here on planet earth and somewhere between 700 to 1,000 years later we see the co2 levels react accordingly to the temperature change, not the other way around. The rise in temperature prior to a rise in co2 indicates simply that co2 and greenhouse gases are not responsible for climate change. The theory, (yes, it is a theory, because the purpose of ANY science is to make predictions based on best available data, all data not just what you choose to include.), that co2 and greenhouse gases are responsible for climate change are simply not true. The climate alarmists we are finding out now more than ever are political activists whose funding is linked to the overall amount of attention they can create. They start out with an answer, HUMANS are the cause of climate change and then search for data to support it. These are not scientists and what they are doing is not science.